Powell and his evidence
Posted 05 February 2003 - 09:25 PM
Yea it is a super power and can defat all of those countries, but it will also leave a bloody nose that will not be easily forgotten.
Iraq is it because it is so easy to bomb and kill people livin gin a 3rd world country under genocidal sanctions that they cant really even buy modern guns lets alone anything to shoot those planes killing their women and children from 50000 feet.
Posted 05 February 2003 - 09:33 PM
UN Predicts 500,000 Iraqi Casualties In Any War By David Edwards Media Lens 2-5-3
United Nations officials say as many as 500,000 Iraqis could require medical treatment as a result of serious injuries suffered in the early stages of a war on Iraq.
The total includes about 100,000 expected to be injured as a direct result of combat and a further 400,000 wounded as an indirect result of the devastation, according to estimates prepared by the World Health Organisation (WHO).
The confidential UN assessment was drafted a month ago but an edited version was posted on Tuesday on the website of a British group opposed to sanctions on Iraq.
UN officials have confirmed the authenticity of the document, which assumes that unlike the 1991 Gulf War, a new war in Iraq would develop beyond an initial aerial bombardment into a large scale and protracted ground offensive.
"The resultant devastation would undoubtedly be great," the UN planners said.
The estimates were based on material from several different UN organisations.
The UN staff has been quietly planning for months how to cope with the humanitarian fallout from a conflict in Iraq.
But the process has been kept largely under wraps for fear it might be interpreted as a sign the world body had concluded the weapons inspections now under way would fail to avert war.
The confidential assessment assumes that Iraqi oil production would be shut down and the Iraqi electricity network, railway and road transportation systems would be significantly damaged.
UN officials had previously disclosed that as many as 4.5 million to 9.5 million of Iraq's 26.5 million people could quickly need outside food to survive once an attack began.
War would also produce a huge refugee problem, driving some 900,000 Iraqis into neighboring countries, with about 100,000 of those requiring immediate assistance as soon as they arrived, the UN estimate said.
Another 2 million could be driven from their homes but remain inside Iraq, where access by relief agencies would be a particular problem due to the fighting, the planners say.
The UN arms inspections resumed last month, after a four-year hiatus, under a UN Security Council resolution giving Baghdad a final chance to eliminate any chemical, biological or nuclear weapons or face "serious consequences".
UN chief weapons inspector Dr Hans Blix is due to provide an interim report to the UN Security Council on his findings on Thursday.
His first in-depth report is set for January 27.
US President George W Bush, who favors a "regime change" in Baghdad, has threatened to disarm Iraq through force if it fails to act on its own, although Washington says no decision has been made to go to war.
The assessment said Iraq can be expected to have four months' supply of basic medical supplies on hand at the start of a conflict.
However, some key supplies would still likely be in short supply or nonexistent, it said.
Children aged under five, pregnant women and mothers who are breast-feeding their infants "will be particularly vulnerable because of the likely absence of a functioning primary health care system in a post-conflict situation," it said.
"Furthermore, the outbreak of diseases in epidemic if not pandemic proportions is very likely.
"Diseases such as cholera and dysentery thrive in the environment... when determining the requirement for pharmaceuticals and medical supplies, these factors must be considered."
Posted 14 February 2005 - 03:38 AM
Powell's evidence has been totally discredited by the facts.
There were no WMDs, not then, not now, not ever.
Except in the fantasy world of spin in which the paranoid delusional right wing reactionaries dwell.
Posted 14 February 2005 - 06:32 PM
An Australian scientist involved in the US search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq today said the CIA censored his reporting so that it suggested the weapons existed.
He also accused the head of Britain
Posted 15 February 2005 - 02:16 AM
Originally posted by Firecat
If they'd wanted to "sex it up" a bit, maybe they should have put a some of this on it...
Please, post a disclaimer along side such horror!!!:mad:
I am now blind and had to ask my little sister for help typing this response :D
Posted 15 February 2005 - 02:10 PM
im wondering now everyone else in the world-even the us's `allies'(spits and washes out mouth in an attempt to get rid of the foul taste)
now knows its was the above option that was shown in the end to be the truth
will the ones who voted/posted otherwise
admit they were WRONG and more importantly have learned something from it???
taps foot impatiently
Posted 16 February 2005 - 01:49 AM
I find this to be totally astounding; the number of people that still believe this was about ties to al-Qaeda and WMDs.
How many people like Blix and Kay have tocome forward and say "no, there weren't any" before these morons will "get" it?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users