Dave Hinz wrote:
On 22 Feb 2005 23:02:09 -0800,
wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:
It's obviously not clear or rational, hence the question to
clarify.
He had no active program. Intent alone produces nothing.
He had intent _and_ ability. Now he has neither. I'd say that the
situation has improved.
That situation has. It is a good thing he did not have WMD since
if he did there is a good chance they would now be in the hands
of fundamentalist Islamic paramilitary groups.
Even if Iraq HAD a vast chemical and biological arsenal and a
few
nuclear weapons Iraq STILL would not have attacked the US.
Again
Saddam Hussein was not terribly bright, but he was not suicidely
stupid.
Your faith in a ruthless dictator and his zealots is, I think,
misplaced.
Nonsense. Any such attack would be suicide for him. I trusted
only that he would not do something that would mean certain
death for himself.
Yeah, because Islamic extremists _never_ would take on an attack
that was guaranteed to kill them. (sheesh).
If you think Saddam Hussein was a fundamentalist Muslim then
clearly you have not been following the situation.
That is precisely why IF Saddam Hussein had WMD it was better
not to distablilize Iraq. After all, Saddam Hussein was
not an Islamic extremist, but during a war, he could lose
control of those WMD and they could wind up in the hans of
Islamic extremists.
http://www.odci.gov/cia/reports/iraq...nts/index.html
You haven't read that page then, obviously. Which specific part
of
it are you claiming shows your point?
Primarily the gas compression and collection system. It is
clearly
designed to compress a huge volume of gas produced very rapidly,
not
the tickle of gas that would be evolved in a fermenter the
size of the reaction vessel. Besides, no one would even consider
using such a system for fermentation gases in the first place.
The primary constituents would be CO2 and/or H2S, same as you'd
get from sewage or internal combustion engine exhaust. Those aren't
going to attract attention. If you wanted to prevent any tell-tale
trace organics from being released you'd use filters condensers,
scrubbers and the like.
Well, _you_ would use those, maybe. Maybe their scientists know more
about the problems than, say, you.
Shortly after these were found the scientist who designed the
trailers was interviewd. If you were interested in knowing
about these issues instead of spouting nonsense you'd find
some other sources fo your own and read up it. It is your
country that is at stake here, don't you think that is
worth a little bit of effort on your part?
You'd have to be nuts to build a huge gas compression and storage
system for a small fermenter like that. OTOH if you were using
NaOH reacting with Aluminum to make Hydrogen you'd need a system
just like that. Wanna bet the cylinders are nickel plated on the
inside?
Hard to say/care, Fred, isn't it. Why don't you go ask to see them?
I'm sure they won't let me.
Because I see it saying that
it's clear they were _NOT_ mobile hydrogen generators. It says
that
was
the cover story. You can find that under the heading of "Hydrogen
production cover story".
See above, clearly they are lying.
So, you posted the link saying "Look, even the CIA backs up my
statement",
Now you're lying. I did not say that. Why is it that you
never check back to see what I did say?
Bull****. I've done lab work that generates noxious gas.
I've had lunch that generates noxious gas.
Did you use a compressor to capture that gas in cylinders?
What's your point.
That's my point.
In other words, you would design them differently if your
assumptions are correct. And?
No, they would be designed differently if YOUR assumptions were
correct. Geez, you really are stupid, aren't you?
The CIA's opinion seems to differ with yours.
They are lying. That is obvious.
Yeah, ok fred, whatever.
According to the CIA, these are capable of producing far more
hydrogen than would be needed. IOW, the CIA claims that the
gas collection system is much larger than needed for a hydrogen
generator. If ao, is it not obvious that it is way, way
oversized for collecting fermentation gasses?
Don't trust me. Check it out for yourself. Did you notice
that the CIA webpages omitted the part about urea?
--
FF