dr3d1zzl3

iTrader: (1)

this could be a good thread..... I like the first one... i dont see any nations threating to invade us for doing the same thing saddam did....

May 1998
The US Senate approves legislation that restricts international inspections of chemical sites in the United States, effectively killing the Chemical Weapons Convention. [Article]

March 2001
US, the worlds largest polluter, unilaterally withdraws from the Kyoto treaty on global warming. [CNN article]

July 2001
US, the worlds largest exporter of arms, prevents the United Nations from curbing the gun trade at an international arms conference. [CNN article]

July 2001
US renounces efforts to negotiate a verification process for the Biological Weapons Convention and brings an international conference on the matter to a halt. [Article; Article; Article]

August 2001
US refuses to sign an international treaty banning germ warfare, saying it would put national security and confidential business information at risk. [BBC article]

May 2003
The Bush administration effectively withdraws the US signature on the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty. It also requests states around the world to approve bilateral agreements requiring them not to surrender American nationals to the ICC. The goal of these agreements ("impunity agreements" or so-called "Article 98 agreements") is to exempt U.S. nationals from ICC jurisdiction'. [Human Rights Watch article]

June 2003
The US is ups the pressure on contries to exempt Americans from war crimes, threatening cutting military aid to countries that fail to sign an agreement exempting American military and other personnel from prosecution in the ICC, and then on July 1 does so for the 35 countries (the complete list available here) which refused. [BBC article; Article; Article; Article; Article; Article; Article; Article]

Today
US stands with Somalia (which currently has no recognised government) as the only two countries in the world to refuse to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (ratification means the convention has to be incorporated into national law). [UNICEF Article; Article; Article; Article]

Salty

iTrader: (14)

I got a few more articles for you, Dr3.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3253783.stm

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,86837,00.html

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/com...E25777,00.html

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/ira...ce_030514.html

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/photogalle...y_11/my11.html

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/27000.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2956129.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2971464.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...sprj.irq.main/

*Rest your cursor over any of the pictures to read its caption for the following 4 url's

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/men...ves.guest.html

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/men...es2.guest.html

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/men...ve3.guest.html

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/men...ve4.guest.html

Shall i start digging up URL's on the Baath Party now? I didn't realize the Whitehouse lawn had so many dead bodies buried in it Maybe Bush dumps all the bodies in the nearby Potomac river?!

psoper

So Salty, how many of those "mass graves" are actually trenches that were full of Saddams "elite republican guard" during the first Gulf war?

As I recall, we pretty much bulldozed over more than a few regiments after we bombed the crap out of them.

And where did all the highway of death bodies wind up? no doubt in one of these mass graves.

just 'cause we dig 'em up now doesn't mean neccesarily that Saddam put them there in the first place.

Not that I'm being apologist for Saddam, no doubt he is a very badd maybe even evil ****, but it was a CIA backed coup that put him in power there in the first place.

psoper

And their probably needing to dig new ones for the victims of our bombing campaigns and depleted uranium dispersions

FUNKED1

Well it's pretty hard to bulldoze over a whole regiment. That's thousands of men.

Also the DU threat is overrated. It's no worse than any other heavy metal (like lead). Bad times if you get shot with it or eat a chunk of it, but as far as "dispersions" you'd have to be right next to a vehicle getting hit to be in trouble.

There are a variety of estimates on how many people per year Saddam has caused to die. Several hundreds of thousands up to millions if you include the Iran-Iraq war and the UN sanctions. The USA ended that in one year at the cost of about 10,000 lives. That's an ugly transaction to make but I think in the long run it will look pretty good.

FUNKED1

IMHO that's an even stronger reason for the US to take him out. Don't you replace your divots when you golf?

psoper

Have you done any investigation into DU? do you have a clue what you're talking about?

it's nasty bad *** stuff, you couldn't legally own a piece of it, and it goes aerosol when it burns, try a google on it- are you telling me that all the "experts" are liars?

How safe is DU?

Leonard Dietz, retired scientist, has estimated the radiation dose from a depleted uranium oxide particle in the lung as being 170 rem per year.13 This dosage from a 2.5 micrometers diameter particle - small enough to be passed into the lung - is 34 times the maximum permissible dose for radiation workers and 100 times the permitted dose for the general population. The dosage from a 5 micrometer diameter particle - still small enough to be inhaled - is 1360 rem, 272 times the maximum permissible dose for a radiation worker. He notes that 'Until these doses can be related to a cancer risk factor, they must be viewed as qualitative indicators of danger, as red flags... the younger the person exposed to alpha particle radiation, the greater the risk that cancer will develop.' In both 1987 and 1990, the US Army issued guidelines on the handling of DU munitions and DU contaminated vehicles. It includes instructions to fire-fighters that they must wear 'self contained breathing apparatus, protective clothing, and gloves when approaching a burning tank... to approach the tank it should be upwind of any smoke coming from the tank''14 No such guidelines have been passed to Iraq. (see DU use during the Gulf War) In July 1992, Professor Gunter of the Albert Schweitzer Institute, brought back to Germany a DU shell he had found in Iraq. He was arrested and accused of 'illegally releasing ionising radiation'. The radioactivity of the shell was confirmed by two laboratories, and it was sealed in a lead lined box. There are no lead lined boxes for the people of Iraq and Kuwait.

dr3d1zzl3

iTrader: (1)

that is the first time i have heard justification for replacing a goverment based on replacing golf divets. What about north korea? We put them in power indirectly.

psoper

Naw, that was the Chinese's divet, let them replace it.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

I stand corrected then... I forgot the "elite republican guard's" uniform SOP consisted of long hair and female bone structures. I also forgot that children were allowed in the Republican Guard. I guess their "elite tactics" required shooting children in the head to convince others of their barbaric nature... for psyops reasons, of course. My bad!

FUNKED1

Only if you equate "dying by the thousands in the snow trying to stop them from taking power" with putting "them in power indirectly."

FUNKED1

Yes. There is plenty of information out there indicating it is not that dangerous. There is a wide range scientific opinions. "Aerosolized" DU is not harmful except in a high concentration which you are only going to get if you are right there when the round impacts something or a tank brews up or something similar to that. It's bad, but compared to the health risks of the getting shot with the damn things it's not too bad.

FUNKED1

It's analogy. I think most humans would agree that if you screw something up you have some obligation to fix it.