• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

OOPs

Help Support Ranchers.net:

passin thru

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
2,603
Reaction score
0
WMD threat.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179316,00.html

U.S. Army Finds Buried Ammunition Cache in Iraq
Tuesday, December 20, 2005


ZUWAD KHALAF, Iraq — U.S. soldiers in the northern Iraqi desert dug up more than 1,000 aging rockets and missiles wrapped in plastic, some of which were buried as recently as two weeks ago, Army officials said Tuesday.

Commanders in the 101st Airborne Division said an Iraqi tipped them off to the buried weapons, perhaps an indication that residents in this largely Sunni Arab region about 150 miles north of Baghdad are beginning to warm up to coalition forces.

"The tide is turning," said 2nd Lt. Patrick Vardaro, 23, of Norwood, Mass., a platoon leader in the division's 187th Infantry Regiment. "It's better to work with Americans than against us."

As the sun set, soldiers from the 101st continued to uncover more, following zigzagging tire tracks across the desert floor and using metal detectors to locate weapons including mines, mortars and machine gun rounds.

"This is the mother load, right here," Sgt. Jeremy Galusha, 25, of Dallas, Ore., said, leaning on a shovel after finding more than 20 Soviet missiles.

The weapons are of primary concern for soldiers in Iraq, where bombs made with loose ordinance by insurgents are the preferred method to target coalition forces.

"In our eyes, every one of these rockets represents one less" bomb, Vardaro said.

Vardaro would not comment on whether there were signs the caches had been used recently to make bombs. But service records accompanying the missiles dated to 1984, suggesting they were buried by the Iraqi military under Saddam Hussein.

Still, the plastic around some of the rockets — of Soviet, German and French origins — appeared to be fresh and had not deteriorated as it had on some of the older munitions.

A U.S. Air Force explosive ordinance team planned to begin destroying them as early as Wednesday morning.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Disagreeable said:
:lol: WMDs? Hardly.

Let's have a definition of WMD's. Do they have to have the capability of killing 1000 people, or 100 people, or just more than one. Or do they just have to have the capability to create destruction on a mass scale?

I would say a grenade can kill several people at one time. Does that qualify?

Go ahead, Dispicable, make up some crap to tell us!
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Still, the plastic around some of the rockets — of Soviet, German and French origins — appeared to be fresh and had not deteriorated as it had on some of the older munitions.

two things disturb me about this,

one France was supposedly our ally, so why were these nations selling out our security interests for thier monitary gain? and why are we supporting thier security by continueing to be involved in protecting them through direct deployment of troops and billions in support of NATO.........

two, if this was found what else is buried in the sand? (other then disagreeables head)
 

Liberty Belle

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,818
Reaction score
4
Location
northwestern South Dakota
two, if this was found what else is buried in the sand? (other then disagreeables head)
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Steve - did you hear Saddam quoted as saying that Jacques Chirac was a close personal friend of his? Their friendship explains a lot of things, doesn't it?
 

theHiredMansWife

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
1,191
Reaction score
0
Location
southwest corner of the Sandhills
Mike said:
Disagreeable said:
:lol: WMDs? Hardly.

Let's have a definition of WMD's. Do they have to have the capability of killing 1000 people, or 100 people, or just more than one. Or do they just have to have the capability to create destruction on a mass scale?

I would say a grenade can kill several people at one time. Does that qualify?

Go ahead, Dispicable, make up some crap to tell us!

WMDs, the way Bush has been using the term, refers to things like nuclear weapons. "mass destruction" being more than just a few hundred people...

We didn't go to war over a few missiles and rockets, or we would have to invade every country on the planet... :wink:

A defintion link:
http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/mtcr_anx.html
weapons of mass destruction (i.e. nuclear, chemical and biological weapons)

I'm gonna guess there's probably a reason the administration called off the search for WMDs almost a year ago...
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
There's more at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WMD

"Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) generally include nuclear, biological, chemical and, increasingly, radiological weapons. The term first arose in 1937 in reference to the mass destruction of Guernica, Spain, by aerial bombardment. Following the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and progressing through the Cold War, the term came to refer more to non-conventional weapons. The terms ABC, NBC, and CBRN have been used synonymously with WMD, although nuclear weapons have the greatest capacity to cause mass destruction. The phrase entered popular usage in relation to the U.S.-led multinational forces' 2003 invasion of Iraq."

I don't think your grenade qualifies, Mike.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
Steve said:
Still, the plastic around some of the rockets — of Soviet, German and French origins — appeared to be fresh and had not deteriorated as it had on some of the older munitions.

two things disturb me about this,

one France was supposedly our ally, so why were these nations selling out our security interests for thier monitary gain? and why are we supporting thier security by continueing to be involved in protecting them through direct deployment of troops and billions in support of NATO.........

two, if this was found what else is buried in the sand? (other then disagreeables head)

Speaking of buried heads, Germany and Russia are also supposed to be our allies. Why are you picking on France. NATO is supporting our war in Afghanistan. You do remember Afghanistan? The place where Osama Bin Laden, under the rule of the Taliban, actually planned and staged the 9-11 attack? The 9-11 attack that Saddam had nothing to do with? The place where the Taliban is making a comeback? That Afghanistan.

Rumsfeld is working hard to get NATO to take more responsibility for the Afghanistan war. That's why we're in NATO, because they offer support for our country, just as we offer support for their countries.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
Liberty Belle said:
two, if this was found what else is buried in the sand? (other then disagreeables head)
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Steve - did you hear Saddam quoted as saying that Jacques Chirac was a close personal friend of his? Their friendship explains a lot of things, doesn't it?

Did you hear Saddam say Americans had been beating and torturing him? Do you believe that? If not, I'd say you're being pretty selective in your beliefs.
 

Latest posts

Top