nigel99

As to funding of Al Quada - what is your opinion of the US government providing funding to set up Al Quada in the first place? I believe the amount was close to US$200 million to Osama Bin Laden and another person (forget his name) for them to form a terrorist network to fight the russians Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

well its freakin wierd but I just got off the phone to a customer (works in military stuff) and he's just done something very similar. He printed a "restricted document" to the wrong printer and now they are trying to find out where the printer is - its a very large company and the printer could be at any number of sites!! Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Iraq co-operated BECAUSE there were armed troops waiting to enter and hence we made progress. The problem was that politicians who put the troops there in the first place had "target fixation" and believed that it would be easy to get rid of SH and cheaper than keeping 100K+ troops on combat standby. They thought that it would be a case of wham bham thanks Uncle Sam. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Go to Zurich they are great. Prices and details are on their website and it should be easy to get their from France. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Correct me on this if I am wrong. But as I understand it Blix and co reported to the UN on schedule at all times. What they reported was that the progress was being made - but that co-operation was not perfect. It was not a black and white issue of he did not comply. I am not aware of any "deadline" after 1441 that he did not comply with? The very cry that came from Blix of give us more time is exactly what the David Kay team were saying for 6 months or so AFTER the end of major combat operations. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Ok genuine question here. How do you reconcile your viewpoint of the UN when both of our governments make as one of their central claims aside from WMD the "enforcement of UN resolutions"? UN success stories... http://www.clw.org/pub/clw/un/unsucess.html Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I am not sure that the financial argument holds up. To me it is as weak as the Bush for Oil argument. Granted this is well into speculative territory but Joseph Wilson talks alot about that period in his book, and he was experienced in both US/French diplomacy and Iraq (granted not a leading expert) but far more knowledgeable than most. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

***there are signs the fallen Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had dormant programs he hoped to revive at a later time It is really funny we have moved from A) Saddam had WMD followed by B) Saddam did not have WMD but had PROGRAMS followed by the latest report C) Saddam had the INTENT to revive DORMANT programs. It seems that there is a significant amount of back-peddling going on. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Kofi Annan as head of the UN has publicly stated that this war was "illegal". http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3661134.stm We are not talking about the opinion of an international law expert here ( I know that there is debate amongst them) - but about the person whose job it is to maintain the organisation. A person in his position will not & should not make these kind of statements without a substantial amount of evidence. edited to add... France & Russia would most certainly have co-operated had inspections been given more time. If you read the transcipts of the time or most political biographies there is a general concencus on this. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I have heard very few people advocating doing nothing. If the US & UK had stayed within the framework provided by the UN then we would still have had a war - BUT it would have been a year later. More importantly there would have been legal and instead of wasting time and energy trying to trip each other up at every turn Europe & the US would be helping each other. Also the Iraqi's would not feel that the USA is "empire building" and hence I believe that internal resistance would be less - hell - the USA can't even convince most of western europe and its own people that it's motives are pure. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

As the UK and US created the mess it is their obligation to fix it. Handing over to the UN is completely unfair as the UN's major peacekeeping forces are the same guys that are on the ground now (US & UK). All that handing control over does is force other nations to pay for our governments mess. (Why should the French, Germans, Russians, Chinese pay for our mess?) Leaving it with the US & UK governments at least means they will pay the political price as the $$ increase... Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I am not a US citizen. Can you name the last 5 prime ministers in the UK? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I wouldn't say it is anybody but Bush. I would say that Bush has the least respect of any president of the US for a long time (in I can't comment on before Reagan era)... I would say that Kerry is an unknown and he certainly hasn't had the international effect/recognition that Al Gore had. I would classify Bush = disliked, Kerry = disinterested. You also need to remember that the Democrats in the US think more like the rest of the world - and hence are usually better perceived. This is not mean't to slam the conservative wing of US just they appear to think differently to most other people... Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

my post wasn't very coherent - what I was alluding to is that is really pisses me off all the outcry of Saddam had WMD - like that in itself was a crime - of course he had them, because WE supplied them to him, actually WE also have WMD... rant is not aimed at you... Again WMD definition seems to growing over time to include anything that goes bang and kills people - and the scope increase to include capabilities to produce WMD is very dangerous. Just because you have the raw ingredients does NOT mean you have the means. It scares me to see the precident that this can set - raw materials in Iraq + western scientists knowledge of what can be done with them does not = WMD. As to your first point as to was it all inert by 2003 - I don't know and I doubt that all WMD have shelf lives that are less than 10 to 20 years - so by implication he probably had some. The really troubling thing though is how did so many people get it wrong? Hanz Blix, David Kay are top names that have conceded that they are puzzled by how little there is to be found. Perhaps it is not WMD that is the question in the middle east but us westerners not understanding what makes their minds tick? If we are so easily duped/mislead how can we ever win the peace? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

yes but the question is do you have an Ammonium nitrate? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I don't think its going to catch on - its been here for 35 years... Started in 1970! Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Can do better - they run an online website from the sun http://www.page3.com NSFW I guess if you work for a conservative US company Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Ok I was just reading the news (BBC) and discovered that Page 3 girls in the sun are unique to britain. Is that true - do any newspapers in the US have topless women in them daily? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

the taliban can't pick nit's with their turbans on so they feel left out Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

UK is definetely worse than what I've seen in the states. Madness on PC - we're not allowed to video our childrens christmas plays/sports days etc in case the video is used for peadophile type reasons?? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Jeez and the US critizes other nations for not protecting WMD's... To think of all the worry about Saddam letting WMD's into terrorist hands. With US ones there is no need to smuggle them in. Mind you with the right to bear arms - a texan somewhere has probably got them in his armament Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Tony Blair? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I believe that both the Reagan administration on the US side and Margaret Thatcher on UK side were key suppliers of WMD to Saddam to aid in the fight against Iran. My source for this allegation is from Robin Cook's biography (ex-foreign minister UK) and hence should know the facts and unlikely to libbel people who are still around. There might be online links I don't know... Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

There is substantial evidence to show that while Saddam was supplied with WMD from the west (UK & USA primarily) he was supplied with the finished product and not the production facilities. This means that while he possessed Anthrax (supplied by the US) it had a 3 to 5 year shelf life - and hence while 10 000 litres was an-accounted for - it was just harmless goo by 2003. Source for this was Robin Cook's biography (Point of Departure) I believe that Saddam had the intent to build WMD but not the capability YET. Again following the other replies I believe it was a bluff - and we also tend to think that everyone thinks like a westerner and they don't. I believe it was a bluff that went wrong/backfired. However we should not forget that the reason that the US/UK supplied him with WMD was a defence against Iran - who no doubt he was still scared of and needed to bluff them. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

talking of idiots and US elections the best comment I have heard was last week on a UK news commedy where a speaker stated "the problem is that essentially George is dumber than Osama" Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.