EPTDear mods, please change the title and put the snopes link into the OP:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/yellowcake.asp
Wikileaks: Yellowcake Uranium in Iraq - Page 11
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Jzerg
84 Posts
Dear mods, please change the title and put the snopes link into the OP: http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/yellowcake.asp | ||
|
Craton
United States17252 Posts
On December 14 2010 15:58 Mindcrime wrote: Do you see any mention of the OP in my last post? You left your statement vague to the point where it's not possible to tell if you meant future posters who haven't read all of the then-existing posts in the thread or if you meant failing to read the OP. Improve your writing instead of making snide remarks. Love, Craton | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On December 14 2010 16:11 Craton wrote: You left your statement vague to the point where it's not possible to tell if you meant future posters who haven't read all of the then-existing posts in the thread or if you meant failing to read the OP. Improve your writing instead of making snide remarks. Love, Craton In context, which includes my other posts in this thread, my meaning was quite clear. | ||
|
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
And yet the op, many people in this thread and probably the big chunk of american people will buy into it and believe that this must mean that Saddam pursued wmds. This is scary, scary shit. I have a hatred for unreflecting people and for others who are doing their best to push that thoughtlessness further or use it to their ends. Please, people, take 100 steps back and observe things from a wider angle before completely flipping out over things. This article changes NOTHING. edit: Also can't wait for the continuation of reports telling about Iran's obtainment of yellowcake and how it must mean that they are pursuing nuclear weapons (I actually believe that I have seen such a report just a few days - 1week back), and that we now must go to war with Iran. | ||
|
rabidch
United States20289 Posts
On December 14 2010 16:35 enzym wrote: I read the op and am immediately reminded of how scared I am of americans and the amount of control the media exerts over them... Yellowcake is a very long way away from being able to be called anything close to wmds, and it isn't even material for wmds exclusively. Yellowcake is basically nothing but a more concentrated form of raw uranium. It is concentrated ore, so to speak. And yet the op, many people in this thread and probably the big chunk of american people will buy into it and believe that this must mean that Saddam pursued wmds. This is scary, scary shit. I have a hatred for unreflecting people and for others who are doing their best to push that thoughtlessness further or use it to their ends. Please, people, take 100 steps back and observe things from a wider angle before completely flipping out over things. This article changes NOTHING. edit: Also can't wait for the continuation of reports telling about Iran's obtainment of yellowcake and how it must mean that they are pursuing nuclear weapons (I actually believe that I have seen such a report just a few days - 1week back), and that we now must go to war with Iran. i dont agree with you 100% but one thing that annoys me is the prevalence of the "slippery slope" | ||
|
AmishNukes
United States98 Posts
| ||
|
shannn
Netherlands2891 Posts
Am I correct to think like this? | ||
|
Dave[9]
United States2365 Posts
On December 14 2010 17:33 shannn wrote: So to be very simple. They had the ingredients to make WMDs / nuclear reactors. But they already had oil so nuclear reactors would be stupid to have. So because of this assumption the US goverment (Bush?) thought it was only for WMDs? Am I correct to think like this? Seems like a damn good assumption to me. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
It wouldn't have been a stretch for him to get the WMD's out of the country, before a big invasion, to try and avoid prosecution. | ||
|
maliceee
United States634 Posts
On December 14 2010 16:42 rabidch wrote: i dont agree with you 100% but one thing that annoys me is the prevalence of the "slippery slope" that slippery slope goes both ways. the guy you quoted fails to see that irony | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
| ||
|
BasedSwag
Algeria418 Posts
On December 14 2010 17:39 Aberu wrote: My buddy was in Air Force Intel, him and everyone else in Intel was 100% convinced that Saddam had weapons. It wouldn't have been a stretch for him to get the WMD's out of the country, before a big invasion, to try and avoid prosecution. Yes it would... because he wouldn't have been tried for having WMDs anyway. He would have been tried for crimes against humanity (which he was). I find it really funny that anyone even began to think this article was accurate, don't you guys think that if the U.S. had documents (which WikiLeaks was able to get a hold of and leak) which proved that Saddam Hussein had WMDs, they would have already released them of their own accord?... | ||
|
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
On December 14 2010 17:46 maliceee wrote: that slippery slope goes both ways. the guy you quoted fails to see that irony "The guy you quoted" supposedly has a name to address him by. Since he quoted my I'm going to assume that you are also referring to me. I don't see where any slippery slope relevant to the discussion is coming into this from just the words I used, though. Maybe you mean that inversely there can also be no guarantee that they were not going to use it for wmds. But that's a stupid point to make. We don't invade countries or imprison people because any materials they have in their possession could possibly be used to cause harm. Why? Because ANY materials can be used to cause harm. Possibility does not equal intent. Could you please elaborate on what you mean by "that slippery slope"? | ||
|
johngalt90
United States357 Posts
| ||
|
.Aar
2177 Posts
I am so confused now. I thought it was basically common knowledge that the WMDs were complete bullshit. But now.. This is really, really, really interesting. | ||
|
hugedong
United States510 Posts
On December 14 2010 16:35 enzym wrote: I read the op and am immediately reminded of how scared I am of americans and the amount of control the media exerts over them... Yellowcake is a very long way away from being able to be called anything close to wmds, and it isn't even material for wmds exclusively. Yellowcake is basically nothing but a more concentrated form of raw uranium. It is concentrated ore, so to speak. And yet the op, many people in this thread and probably the big chunk of american people will buy into it and believe that this must mean that Saddam pursued wmds. This is scary, scary shit. I have a hatred for unreflecting people and for others who are doing their best to push that thoughtlessness further or use it to their ends. Please, people, take 100 steps back and observe things from a wider angle before completely flipping out over things. This article changes NOTHING. edit: Also can't wait for the continuation of reports telling about Iran's obtainment of yellowcake and how it must mean that they are pursuing nuclear weapons (I actually believe that I have seen such a report just a few days - 1week back), and that we now must go to war with Iran. The dictator that commits genocide on his own people while funding terrorist organizations that constantly attack the rest of the world is collecting materials used in the construction of nuclear weapons. I wonder what he's going to do with it......? You also act like anyone even takes the media seriously. Everyone that isn't retarded knows most of the shit on the news are either absolutely exaggerated or outright false information. It is like that in the entire world. | ||
|
BeJe77
United States377 Posts
It was also known that Sadam had many chemical weapons, but hey guess what, as part of the peace thing back ohh in 1990's he was supposed to destroy them, that's why you had those "UN INSPECTORS" go into his country, you know the ones that got kicked out? to inspect for those type of weapons/nukes. Did it justify a war? Hard to say, Sadam was unstable, used chemical weapons on his own people, thousands died each year at the hands of government, people tortured etc etc...So you might deal with him now, while non of those weapons are built, or when he has them and create tons of unnecessary casualties for your army. The only issue is that the U.S. fell in the same pitfall as Russia did, lot of insurgents that are hard to get rid of, forcing you to stay there until the government is strong enough to support themselves. It's the same situation now with Iran, they have the technology to build the nukes, but will they do it and if they do it what should the world do about it? The right to have nuclear weapons for any nation had never been actually about keeping nations away from the technology. It had more to do with the possibility of those weapons getting into hands of extremists/terrorists, you know, the people who would not second guess themselves in actually using the weapons. This is especially true for the situation in Pakistan and the Taliban insurgency, what if the government collapses, what happens to those nukes? But yeah, argument is lot of IF's. | ||
|
VabuDeltaKaiser
Germany1107 Posts
On December 14 2010 18:11 .Aar wrote: This.. is pretty freaking weird. I don't know what to say or think about this. I am so confused now. I thought it was basically common knowledge that the WMDs were complete bullshit. But now.. This is really, really, really interesting. ROFL i mean yea nobody reads anything but the headline of this thread. nor any pages and posts in here, like there are thousands and thousands that shortly sums up what is up. i follow it with joy and grief how everybody shows his true self. but. that was too amazing, thank you for your post that was making me laugh like i did not long long times before. ... just thank you. like how right your are but how close you shred the point is just amazing. | ||
|
.Aar
2177 Posts
On December 14 2010 18:25 VabuDeltaKaiser wrote: ROFL i mean yea nobody reads anything but the headline of this thread. nor any pages and posts in here, like there are thousands and thousands that shortly sums up what is up. i follow it with joy and grief how everybody shows his true self. but. that was too amazing, thank you for your post that was making me laugh like i did not long long times before. ... just thank you. like how right your are but how close you shred the point is just amazing. All I said was that it was interesting. I made no actual point regarding the validity of the headline of this thread. -kind of an bad-tempered note edited out; matter was resolved via PM- | ||
|
s.a.y
Croatia3840 Posts
Like it was said, recycling old news, nothing new. They didn't even link the article to wikilieaks files. | ||
| ||
