If an impartial judge of Planet XYZ came to earth to arbitrate on "WMD"...

[LynnTheDem]

-USA is the only nation in human history to have used actual WMD (nukes).

-USA wages illegal supreme crime wars of aggression, against US law, international law, and the US's own Constitution.

-USA uses WMD and illegal banned weapons including currently in Iraq.

-USA is the #1 arms dealer, including WMD and real WMD (nukes) in the world.

-USA is the largest stockpiler of WMD (nukes and chem and bio weapons).

-USA now has government policy of preventive wars (wars of aggression ie Pearl Harbor and Poland).

-USA has a very long history which continues today of supporting severely oppressive regimes for US purposes, usually as surrogate soldiers and usually resulting in the deaths of great numbers of innocent civilians, and then dropping the regimes, declaring them "evil monsters" and waging war on them.

America would be the VERY LAST nation any impartial judge would allow to have WMD.

Yet the USA does have them, insists on the American right to have them, violates anti-WMD treaties yet uses such violations by anyone else as a reason for war, refuses to sign onto new anti-WMD treaties yet insists other nations do so, and insists on the right to declare who else may and may not have WMD.

Incredible hypocrisy that is not lost on the rest of the world.

Is it just a "might makes right" mindset? Is it a Nazi-esque arrogance and superiority complex?

WHY does America believe only America has the right to whatever WMD America wants, and to determine what other nations can & can't have any?

[lapfog_1]

1. While I agree with your sentiment...

History doesn't support your statements:

-USA is the only nation in human history to have used actual WMD (nukes).

not true... chemical and biological weapons have been used by
many nations in the last 100 years. Going waaaay back in history
it was common practice in the middle ages to attempt to potion entire
populations by using diseased animals... not to mention using salt
(chemical weapon) to destroy crops and starve your neighbor. We are
the only nation to use nuclear weapons... however, is there ANYONE
here who thinks that Germany or Japan or the former Soviet Union
(or even the British for that matter) would have NOT used "atom
bombs" in WWII if they had them?

However, more recently, Iraq, the Soviet Union, and the United States
have all used chemical weapons on other nations...

-USA wages illegal supreme crime wars of aggression, against US law, international law, and the US's own Constitution.

True. BUT, had we the opportunity to wage a war of aggression against
Hitler's Germany in 1938, should we not have done it? It's a
difficult thing to say yes or no to this.

-USA uses WMD and illegal banned weapons including currently in Iraq.

Hmmm. Other than Depleted Uranium shells (which is a serious problem)
I don't believe there are any credible reports of us using WMDs.
Torture... yup... WMD no.

-USA is the #1 arms dealer, including WMD and real WMD (nukes) in the world.

Ummm no, #1 arms dealer, yes. Nukes? I sincerely doubt that. In fact, I don't believe that we SELL nukes to anyone, ever. Did
we sell precursor materials, yeah... have we sold technology, yeah.
Did we perhaps, clandestinely, equip Israel with nukes, quite
possibly. Do we sell nuclear warheads on the open arms market?
Nope.

-USA is the largest stockpiler of WMD (nukes and chem and bio weapons).

No, that title belongs to the former Soviet Union, and now Russia
(even with the numerous breakaway former Soviet states retaining
their nukes, Russia still outnumbers the US).

-USA now has government policy of preventive wars (wars of aggression ie Pearl Harbor and Poland).

Not a good analogy. We are engaged in preventive wars (which are
wrong, IMHO). But we are not "sneak" attacking anyone ala Pearl
Harbor.

[LynnTheDem]

2. Yes actually and in fact, history does support every point

-Only nukes are actual "WMD" which is why my OP says "ACTUAL WMD" and has (nukes) in brackets

-Whether we SHOULD have waged a war of aggression that we didn't wage is irrelevant to the extreme. What I said was we DO wage them and it IS illegal to do so.

-cluster bombs are banned weapons and classed as WMD...willy pete is a banned weapon...DU is a banned weapon

-#1 arms dealer in the world YES. And yes we sell nuke warheads and no of course not on open markets. bush Admin offered last year to sell nukes to Pakistan...as well as chem and bio weapons for "self defense purposes".

You can google that or I can go look out my link later tonight for you.

-US is the world's largest stockpiler of WMD; again there are lots of google links

-The only difference between Iraq and Pearl Harbor is the Japanese had far more valid justification for their attack and their attack was on a military target. They also killed far less people.

Edit: I'm incorrect on cluster bombs; they are in process of being banned.

[lapfog_1]

3. Let me get this straight

in one place you want to closely define WMDs to only be nuclear
weapons... to support your stmt that the US is the only government
to use WMDs, then in another place, you want to put conventional
weapons such as cluster bombs in the category of WMD so that you
can support your stmt that the US has used WMDs against Iraq.

OK. Sure thing.

We are NOT the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons, not by a long
shot. You are simply wrong on this point.

http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=nd02norris

The US has some 8,000 operational nuke warheads in it's current
arsenal... Russia (not including former Soviet states) has 8,600
operational warheads and some TEN THOUSAND more which could be
made operational again (or be completely dismantled as called for
by signed treaties).

The Japanese attacked Pearl to eliminate our ability to interfere
with their plans to invade other Pacific rim targets, namely the
Dutch East Indies, the Philippines, and possibly Australia. They
"needed" to invade these countries to gain access to various resources.

But I don't think I care to debate someone who believes that the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was "far more valid" than our invasion
of Iraq. Both were wrong. One was done as a sneak attack with no
warning, one was covered by the world press including the delivery
of various hollow ultimatums.

[LynnTheDem]

4. Nothing to do with what I want.

Actual "WMD" are nukes. The UN and bushCartel call chem & bio weapons "WMD" as well. bushCartel also include airplanes, liberals, Saddam Hussein and the US Teachers Union "WMD".

And AGAIN, as I ALREADY pointed out to you, my original post says VERY CLEARLY that the US was the ONLY nation to have dropped ACTUAL WMD (NUKES)

As the spouse of a "WMD" expert I DON'T LIKE calling ANYTHING "WMD" except NUKES. So I said "ACTUAL WMD" and in BRACKETS I put NUKES.

THIS line of my OP should ALSO have made it VERY VERY CLEAR to you, THE FIRST TIME:

-is the #1 arms dealer, including WMD and real WMD (nukes) in the world.

What I could have said if I'd known SOME people wouldn't be able to understand, was simply that the US is the only nation to have NUKED anyone. PARDON ME for crediting some with MORE intelligence than they possess.

I am so NOT interested in getting into a PISSING CONTEST with you and WTF is WRONG with you anyways???

ANSWER my actual QUESTION in my original post or go away and bother someone else already. Thanks.

[LynnTheDem]

5. "WMD" hubby says you are perhaps unaware of the difference in terminology

In which case I was hasty & should have posted them, so I'll do so now;

Weapons experts outside of the UN do not use the term "WMD". It's ABC (atomic/bio/chem) or, if you're a military weapons expert, it's NBC (nuclear/bio/chem).

Both ABC and NBC experts define ONLY nukes as capable of delivering mass destruction.

The term "WMD" is a UN-invented term that lumps nukes, chems and bios all together.

So to ABC/NBC experts, WMD means ONLY nukes, and most are not happy with the UN's definition of WMD, which if you ask rightwingnuts even includes people.

Because "WMD" is now such a very widely used term, thanks to bushCartel's constant chanting of the word, I don't use "NBC" or "ABC" much because many people may not know what that is.

Many DUers do know; and that's why so often you'll see posts on the board with WMD typed as "WMD". Sort of a sarcastic sneer at the word.

That is why I posted in my original post that only the USA has dropped quote- actual WMD (nukes) -end quote. I did think the word nukes in brackets would clearly inform people of what I meant by "actual" WMD versus just "WMD".

My bulletin point where I posted "WMD and actual WMD (nukes)" was my attempt at differentiating between all the various items lumped together in the UN/bushCartel definition of WMD versus the ONLY TRUE ACTUAL WMD, which are nukes (per the weapons experts snobs).

If you didn't understand this -and there's no reason why you should have- then I apologize for my failure to have made this clear to you right off. I assumed (mother of all f*ck-ups) that you did know and were just baiting me.