🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 10:06:42 -0800, Bret Ripley <rip...@olywa.net>
wrote:

>In article <8d9r8v8224sfs2ppc...@4ax.com>, 
>br...@zakalwe.demon.co.uk says...
>> On Thu, 03 Apr 2003 22:12:06 +0100, Lemming
>> <l3m...@bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> >Bret Ripley <rip...@olywa.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>In article <A4Nia.23982$Hx.14...@twister.socal.rr.com>, bhuffma1
>> >>@REMOVE-THISsan.rr.com says...
>> >>> 
>> >>> "Lemming" <l3m...@bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >>> news:igmm8v82tq5ga16pl7haej658j54uuvdmo@4ax.com...
>> >>> 
>> >>> > I'm just please they have found all those chemical and biological
>> >>> > weapons.  Makes the whole thing worthwhile.  What a relief.
>> >>> 
>> >>> I'm convinced that they will find some. Why else would the Iraqi army have those
>> >>> NEW gas masks and chemical suits?
>> >>
>> >>For the same reason that the US has NEW gas masks and chemical suits?  
>> >>
>> >>Even if Irag doesn't have bio & chem weapons (and I think it rather 
>> >>probable that they do), there are countries that pose a threat to Iraq 
>> >>that definitely have them.
>> >>
>> >>You know the US has bio & chem weapons, right?
>> >
>> >Shurely shome mishtake?
>> >
>> >Repeat after me: 
>> >
>> >The US does not have ANY biological or chemical weapons.  Period.
>> >
>> >The anthrax that was sent around the USA after 11/9 was NOT produced
>> >in the USA.  Period.
>> >
>> >The UK is NOT the world's most prolific producer of germ warfare
>> >agents.  Period.
>> 
>> All fine points, and no argument from me on the agenda ridden, double
>> standard standpoint of the coalition.
>> 
>> However, I wonder when the US government will get around to dropping
>> it's supply of comicals on some of it's northern cities?
>
>Hmmmm.  I can't speak for Lemming, but my point was that it is just 
>possible that Iraq had chem suits to defend *against* attacks from an 
>enemy using chem weapons.  I mentioned that the US had such weapons, not 
>because I think we would use them in Iraq, but because Iraq might not 
>share my PollyAnna opinion.

I understand that. And I was just pointing out what I feel to be the
differences between two particular systems of governance are.

>> Just cos something is wrong doesn't mean something else isn't wronger.
>
>Oh, I agree.  That's why I'm not convinced that invasion was the best 
>solution.

Neither am I. I would hope that some other way to resolve the
situation could have been found, for the sake of future scenarios even
if it's too late for this one. My worry - and the reason for my view -
is that any other solution would simply have taken too long. With the
lovely Uday and Qusay waiting in the wings I do not feel that the
Iraqi people's fate can once again be re-scheduled to a convenient
diplomatic moment. War is not the answer, obviously, but I just cannot
imagine how leaving hundreds of thousands of innocents to the fate of
the million before them can be a solution either. I have no wish to
argue with anyone about this here, in fact, there's been admirable
deference to others views so far in this group, I hope we can keep it
that way. 

Does anyone have Pierre's address?

br d