"Nerve Gas Used" in Capturing Saddam

[DuctapeFatwa]

US troops used nerve gas as they broke into Saddam Hussein's hiding place to capture him, ITAR-TASS reported Monday, citing Saudi press. The substance's effect was felt also by some local people, the agency said.

Saddam was captured in a US raid on Saturday, and reportedly showed no resistance when they found him in a mud hut basement near his hometown of Tikrit. The ousted dictator, however, insisted for negotiations.

I am Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq, and I want to negotiate, the man has told US soldiers as they broke into the underground hideaway.

Saddam is currently in US custody...

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=29039

The Novinite site url above has Dec 17 as the date but the story itself has a Dec 15 tag line, so I didn't put it in the breaking news dish

[Nlighten1]

1. That explains the disoriented and talkative nature

of the former dictator when he was captured. I can tell you this though...nerve gas is NOT a standard issue weapon for combat.

[DS1]

21. or maybe it was living in a hole for weeks on end

with only the slightest bit of human contact. Everyone breaks.

[Nlighten1]

108. True

By the looks of that beard I would say it was months on end not weeks.

[bearfartinthewoods]

110. i suspect he only took to that hole when guards warned that troops

were in the area. the rest of whatever time he spent there was in the shack, imho.

as to the drugged appearence....take your average 70 something years old who has enjoyed almost total power and control, and put him on the run, hunted by a freakin army for nine months...never a moment to really relax, never a full night's sleep, watching his power being torn away....and then being forced, for the umpteenth time, to hide in a coffin sized hole..i think most would seem disoriented.

[aquart]

2. Maybe this will soften the shame for the Iraqis.

How could any man be expected to fight to the death if he's been gassed and no longed capable of controlling his body?

Or it may increase their anger. And fear. We ARE accusing Saddam of gassing his own people, aren't we? Now it's OUR tactic.

[mikehiggins]

3. If true, or even if only claimed, this is major bad news for the occupatio

If the muslim world comes to beleive this, then the rap that Saddam just surrendered like a whipped cur goes right out the window.

Worse yet, if we used "nerve gas" on him then the US looks like a war criminal too, right?

If Bush wasn't in the White House I wouldn't beleive this for a moment, but he is, so it's possible.

And that is the problem in a nutshell, isn't it? Anything is possible with this guy.

[PSR40004]

4. LOL....

Like US troops are going to stand around while deploying nerve gas... Come to think about it was the saudi press present? I believe CNN was around and they haven't said anything. IMO it's a pro arab paper trying to help sadam save face..

[DUreader]

6. LOL, go back to CNN, lap it up. Gas Mask?

[economic justice]

7. Yep, Poor Saddam......

What the poster said about it being an Arab inspired ploy to help Saddam save face made a lot of sense. Your response was typical of the attitude here lately. I can't believe the number of apologists for Saddam Hussein we have here at DU. Poor, Saddam. How dare them! Puhleazzze.

[DUreader]

11. Your Blatant smear campaign is pathetic and transparent

Just Like US Fuckwad Mass Media.

[economic justice]

18. ???? Not hardly

What is pathetic is acting like poor Saddam is some kind of victim. How is calling you on that a smear? How is my post a "smear campaign" anymore than your post is a "Pro-Saddam" campaign? Get real! You can't act like Saddam Hussein is anything more than a thug who deserves WHATEVER he gets and not be called on it! Surprise, all democrats are NOT as far left as some of you "peace at any cost" types.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Knoxville_Bob]

14. Hey ever been trained on nerve gas

Sure have - full suit, mask, MOPP4 - all the fun stuff. Odd thing - I didn't notice anyone in any of the video using any sort of protective gear, aside from the standard issue ballastic packages and load bearing stuff.

[PSR40004]

15. not to mention...

All those guys rolling around the area getting in and out of the hole, nerve agents just don't disapear.... There's no way nerve gas was used. Sadam was just a coward, is that too hard to figure out :) .

[DUreader]

16. Smirk away, laughing boy, notice the "quotations"

Nerve agents could translate many ways

Euphoria/disorientation gasses would not require a full suit for protection

Likewise a quick shot of epi or some adrenal shit may work fine

Thanks for trying to educate everyone who doesn't fawn on the beautiful

Anchor Whores and suck W*'s Dick.

[DuctapeFatwa]

8. I was not aware of the great affection between Saddam and the Saudis

What other information is available about that?

[DUreader]

5. What is one more violation of Geneva after so many others

Dubby don't Care

Its A Crusade, dontcha'know?

[Dirk39]

10. Once upon a time...

U.S. citizens did unmask the most undignified people, you could ever imagine in the history of mankind, by simply treating them with the respect, they didn't deserve. Now, former allies compete in violating even the lowest standards of human behaviour.
I'd like to see all of them, Bush, Saddam, Bin Ladden, Cheney, Blair and Powel in front of the same court being treated with the respect, they don't deserve.
Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[karabekian]

9. i dont buy it

"citing Saudi press."

Well it must be true. :eyes: Saddam went out a coward,a coward like most dictators are. This is just an exuse why a man who urged so many to "martyrdom" and the fight against occupation, allowed himself to be so easily captured. Which I am sure he did.

[jobycom]

12. So his daughter was right, if this is true. He was drugged. nt

nt

[Silverhair]

17. What a pile of bull.

So we use it on Saddam, and our own guys, who aren't wearing protective gear, aren't affected? Yeah, right - NOT. It is disgusting the number of Saddam apologists that are suddenly appearing around here.

Just because he is W's enemy, it does not mean he is our friend.

During the Cold War the USA propped up lots of dictatorship on the grounds that they were anticommunist. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. It came around to bite us in the butt. Saddam was one of those we helped, and it backfired bigtime.

And now many DUers want to back Saddam because he is anti-W. Sickening. Saddam is evil. Period.

[economic justice]

19. THANK YOU!

A little sanity around here.

[DUreader]

20. More BS Smear Tactics, Anyone Who Questions The Official Story

Is Now A Saddam Apologist

[economic justice]

28. Here's why DUReader

Read this quick post from the thread above:

"Like US troops are going to stand around while deploying nerve gas... Come to think about it was the saudi press present? I believe CNN was around and they haven't said anything. IMO it's a pro arab paper trying to help Saddam save face.."

Your response?

"LOL, go back to CNN, lap it up. Gas Mask?"

Sounds an awful lot to me like if anyone thinks Saddam is a thug that you believe they are brainwashed by CNN or something. That just MIGHT be the reason you come across as a Saddam apologist. What IS your problem with capturing Saddam....and I'll ask....are you GLAD he's now a prisoner?

[aquart]

101. And soft on terror.

I live 32 blocks from Ground Zero and my BS meter screeched when George sat there, utterly incurious, while his people, AMERICANS, in a major population center, were dying. It was, I thought later, like he was establishing an alibi, proof of his innocence.

Every human I met that day was desperate to help. George sat. Then he ran as far away as he could get. George sure as hell didn't get on a blood line like so many Americans did.

Our Republican mayor was caught when the buildings fell and didn't retreat to take care of himself first. He took care of US.

George didn't care what happened. George only saw the golden opportunity. The TRIFECTA, as he kept repeating at fundraiser after fundraiser, even after people noticed, was what 9/11 was part of, a great piece of good luck that would ram his sucky legislation through.

You can pretend he was some sort of hero that day. I was here and he wasn't. Oh, and he lied about when he heard. He told three separate stories, all easily debunkable lies. You can check it out for yourself.

Or try this: <http://www.jointhebushwhackers.com/not_a_liar.cfm>

[nhtfopo]

107. I don't think you're a Saddam Apologist

But I would question your intelligence if you think that US troops with no equipment to protect themselves used nerve gas, which will kill you, on someone who was less than ten feet away from them. First off, Saddam isn't dead. No troops died in the capture. That should be evidence enough that nerve gas wasn't used.

The villagers "feeling the effects" also would be dead and not giving statements to the Saudi press.

Just because people shoot down a completely stupid and obviuosly false news report doesn't mean they are calling you an apologist or taking away your free speech rights or saying you aren't a patriot.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Silverhair]

24. Because I am anti-Saddam, I am a Bush lover?

You are indeed badly infected with the meme of: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". You chain of logic appears to be: Silverhair is anti-Saddam / Saddam is anti-Bush / Therefore Silverhair is pro-Bush. That kind of reasoning would get you an F minus in any logic class.

And the claim that we used nerve gas on Saddam doesn't square with the evidence.

Of course, the tinfoil hatters will believe anything without any evidence if it fits their preconcieved notions.

[economic justice]

30. Not only that

But it's obvious that DU has several LOUD voices who have no problem not only criticizing our foreign policy (fair game and I usually agree with the criticism) but take it a step further and DEFEND thugs like Saddam Hussein and get upset when poor Saddam might not be treated properly. Have you ever seen the video of Saddam at his Baath Party conference when he was named President? Calling out enemies names and having them executed in the back room and laughing about it? ANY book on Iraqi history will tell you how he consolidated power by ASSASSINATION. Not anybody I care to be too concerned with.

[Don Claybrook]

23. So here's the deal

I don't know exactly what happened with this capture, nor do you, nor does anyone who has posted in this thread.

We have a Saudi publication (don't know about their reputation) reporting about the capture of Saddam Hussein (lying, murderous piece of shit). The capture was carried out by forces who work for George W. Bush (lying, murderous piece of shit).

So all we have to go on is
-common sense, and,
-the word of a Saudi publication (reputation unknown).

We just can't take the word of the other players in this scene because, as stated before, they're lying pieces of shit.

For illustrative purposes, we also have a story about a soldier present at the capture intoning to Hussein, "President Bush sends his greetings", or somesuch. Was this really said? Maybe, maybe not, but we just can't trust it to be a true portrayal since these lying pieces of shit don't have a real great track record at telling the truth. Ever.

As it happens, the common sense element tells me that if the soldiers there weren't wearing any protective gear, then maybe this gas wasn't used after all, and this is a piece of propaganda. But of course, this is predicated on the condition that this capture actually happened on Saturday. And that, of course, cannot be confirmed (see lying pieces of shit, above).

It's hard to make heads or tails of the whole thing, isn't it?

[Silverhair]

26. In a confined space like that of the small crawl space,

ANY gas can be lethal as it displaces the oxygen. The simplist explanation for Saddam's state is sensory deprivation. He was laying in a dark hole, unable to see anything, unable to hear anything, nothing to note the passing of time. It produces effects similar to what was reported to have been observed in Saddam.

Let's use some common sense. The only gas around would have come from Saddam's ass.

[Cooley Hurd]

25. No one is saying Saddam is a victim here...

But if the details of the "capture" are found to be false (as I'm beginning to suspect), then it should be exposed. I'm sick to death of the lies the WH floats out there as fact, and they're virtually unchallenged on any of them.

I wrote this in a previous thread today, and the gas thing fits my theory:

<snip>
My premise - Coalition forces knew his whereabous for a while & the WH staged the capture. Coalition troops would swoop in and grab Saddam:

A) When the White House thought it politically expedient to do so (to knock anything embarassing off the front pages - like the Halliburton scandal) and...
B) When the ground forces could be certain he could be taken alive, so they could parade him around and humiliate him in front of the whole world.

I'd be willing to bet that they decided to go in and grab Saddam when he was sound asleep. They gassed the hole and pulled him out, jammies and all...
</snip>

[Silverhair]

27. Please present reasonable evidence. Simply saying so

doesn't make it so. Have you ever heard of Occam's Razor. Try applying it in this case.

Simplist solution is that they finally found him. Why is that so hard to believe?

I submit for your consideration that at any time when the capture may have taken place, you would say that it was at a politically expedient time and therefore arranged to be at that time.

I am not defending Bush. I am objecting to a lack of common sense.

[Don Claybrook]

29. Please present reasonable evidence

The Bush Administration simply saying so doesn't make it so. They do appear to have a record of lying about everything they get their hands on.

And maybe it's academic this time.

It does appear that Saddam Himself has been captured. When and how, who knows. But he's caught and Bush is most assuredly capitalizing on the occasion.

But, these jokers NEVER need to get a free pass. They're compulsive liars and they need to be questioned at every turn, even the seemingly-insignificant ones. They brought this on themselves by being such shifty liars. They earned it.

Common sense is great, but it'll only take you so far. There is every possibility that the Bushies are lying through their teeth about the methods, timing. And maybe they're not, but if they were known truth-tellers, this wouldn't be a problem. They made the deceitful bed and they can lie down in the damned thing.

[economic justice]

31. No....that's wrong

"They should never be given a free pass."

In other words, just ASSUME everything they say is a lie? Politics at that point becomes, "He said - She said" with no intellectual compass. This sounds a lot like how freepers were with Clinton.

[thebigidea]

33. are you serious? OF COURSE we should assume everything he says is a lie

"There are no plans on my desk." Remember that one?

[Don Claybrook]

36. We couldn't have known

that balsa anthrax gliders...um, I mean, airliners, would be used to hit buildings.

He has WMD and we know where they are. Well, he had programs, or at least aspirations for programs and a little shiny thing under a bush and some weather balloons.

Or do you remember this one:
We're opening an office of disinformation in the Pentagon. We may sometimes tell you the truth. We may sometimes lie to you. You'll never know which is which
then, 2 days later.....
Uh, nevermind about that office of lying. We're not going to do that. Everything we say will be truthful from now on.

We could go on and on, and who knows, maybe that's what I'll spend my night doing...

[economic justice]

37. That's ridiculous

There's no use discussing this then - huh? If we start from the premise that our government is lying, we are full-blown tin foilers. I think you accept what the government, the media, etc. says UNTIL you are presented with evidence to the contrary. We have plenty of THAT without a need to assume that our government ALWAYS is lying. I am not defending Bush, I am taking a rational position. There is a "radical center" at DU and I say "center" only because of the geographic standard set by the far left here at DU. Anywhere else and we'd be leftist agitators!

[thebigidea]

38. taken the blue pill, huh?

"I think you accept what the government, the media, etc. says UNTIL you are presented with evidence to the contrary."

Bwahahah! Um, no.

Not the Bush administration. They've told thousands of lies, backed out of every promise made, fucked up the world, started wars based on lies... and I'm to accept what they say?

Feel free to trust Bush, though. I'm sure he appreciates it.

[economic justice]

44. Whatever

It must be sad to live with such assumptions. You obviously have quite an apparatus to go out and find out what the housing start figures are each month, and do your own census, ad nauseum.

[thebigidea]

46. Oh, my life is sad and utterly devoid of joy

I lie awake and night wishing I could summon up the courage you have... the courage to take Bush at his word at all times, to look into his eyes and see his soul. And to like what you see.

May God Continue to Bless America!

[Don Claybrook]

40. I'll wear 'Leftist Agitator' like a badge of honor

And truth.

[economic justice]

41. Wear it proudly

Just be prepared to lose in November if we run someone who also claims to wear "Leftist Agitator" as a badge of honor! That would REALLY play well. :crazy:

edit to correct fast typing error.

[Don Claybrook]

49. Not to worry. It looks like I'm voting for a centerist this time

See the dean logo to the left?

Sure, I'd rather see Kucinich in office, but I'm going for the win, so I picked a centerist.

[aquart]

100. We aren't STARTING from the premise our government is lying.

We got here by a long hard disillusioning journey.

BushCo routinely lies. It lies even when it doesn't have to. It never tells the truth. It will reshape, retailor, rewrite the lies, but it will NOT tell the truth about anything.

Because you can't say that, HEY! WE'RE IN AND WE'RE TAKING EVERYTHING THAT ISN'T NAILED DOWN AND THEN WE'RE COMING BACK FOR THE NAILS!

People would put them in jail if they told the truth. It's that simple. So they lie.

Now that isn't a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. It's factual observation. And, sweetie, all it takes is a quick Google to get more mountains of fact than you will ever want to know about the lies, their quantity and quality. It's breathtaking. Arrogance like that always is.

But the best way to enable them in their criminal behavior is to refuse to believe in the possibility or the FACT: BushCo lies.

[Don Claybrook]

34. Then they shouldn't have insisted on being such compulsive liars

Again, the Bush Administration made this particular bed, and they can sleep on it.

The assumption shouldn't be that everything they say is a lie, but that it's meaningless without verification.

Would you mind giving me some examples of where we should trust the word of the Bush Administration without verification?

Better yet, name an instance where the Administration has told the truth (in regards to policies, PR, and so on) and it has benefitted them.

Thank you for your time.

[Silverhair]

39. By taking that approach you surrender your judgement.

If he said the sky is red at sunset, it must be green type of attitude puts W in control because you commit yourself to doing the opposite of whatever he does, or says. To automatically assume that he is always lying leaves you unable to determine truth from lie. The best liars mix lies and truth together smoothly.

Look how long it took so many DUers to believe that he went to Bdad for T-day. Some still don't believe it. They concocted wild theories of secret filming locations in Nevada and so on. I accepted instantly that he actually went to Bdad because it made sense and because it wasn't a hard thing to do.

Do you realize that the tinfoil hatters helped W on that story? All the stupid objections KEPT THE STORY ALIVE AND GETTING NEWS COVERAGE!!! Our silliness over the turkey being a display bird helped him too. Everytime that story was played, the video was of W holding that platter, even as the voice may have been asking questions. Have you ever heard that a picture is worth a thousand words? So the viewer sees that picture and that has a far greater impact than the words do. So the tinfoil hatters helped keep that story alive for a week, when it should have been a one day story.

[thebigidea]

43. thank God we have you here to tell us what to believe

I wouldn't be able to function without your firm words of wisdom, your candor, your utter dedication to the truth. How foolish I was to doubt the words of Bush! Thanks for setting us all straight - and maybe, just maybe... making us all laugh at love... again.

[Silverhair]

45. I simply apply logic, instead of knee jerk emotional reactions.

Try using logic sometime. It works great.

[thebigidea]

48. if logic leads to posts like yours, I'll stay silly. Thanks anyway, though

Anything else you'd like to lecture me on? Perhaps you can continue feeling smug by pointing out other faults of mine. For example, I think I ended up paying a lot for a muffler once. CASTIGATE ME for it!

[Don Claybrook]

47. No, my judgement is intact

I can verify the color of the sunset with my own eyes. Lacking sight, I could verify it with people who have proven themselves trustworthy.

Yes, the best lies are a mixture of truth and lies. But that's akin to multiplying a number by zero. The real number (the truth) is multiplied by the lie (the zero), but the answer is always zero.

I understand a little about nuance. I understand that Bush had to pick a pretty bad guy to go attack to make it halfway-plausible, and he found that bad guy in Saddam Hussein. Wouldn't have worked with the Dalai Lama as a target.

In the end, my judgement remains intact and unscathed precisely because I take nothing these liars say at face value.

You do realize, by the way, that this discussion has moved well past this hole in the ground? That particular item may or may not be true, but if it is, it's only because the Bushies calculated that the truth would serve them better in this situation than any of the lies they considered as alternate stories.

[Cooley Hurd]

50. Lying liars...

Check this out - it's a list of WH lies about the Iraq war. Read it and tell me why one shouldn't be cynical when it comes to Bush and Iraq:

A List of Bush LIES on Iraq - A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY

[Silverhair]

55. There is a difference between cynical, and automatic inversion.

To automatically assume everysingle thing is a lie is to forfiet judgement. To doubt and desire verification is to use judgement. You started off on the assumption that everything was a lie. Now you have moved to skeptism, and that is a different matter. Now with a little common sense you will be able to know when to doubt, and when not to.

[thebigidea]

59. tune in next week for Lesson 32: How to be a Incredibly Pedantic

[tkmorris]

95. Oh man is that funny, thanks <nt>

[Don Claybrook]

60. I don't disbelieve everything

There are criteria: when the Bush Administration says it, it needs to be independently verified. When others make statements, I'm a little more open.

As to your point about skepticism v. not-believing, I did cover that in another post, and alluded to it in this one, above. It's not that I think any of their given statements is a lie, or the truth. It's more a case that these statements are useless without verification. On their own, these statements don't yield enough information to determine whether or not they're truthful. If one has to make a snap judgement about a given statement, it's best to assume it's a lie, because their record preceeds them. However, this is just an assumption. It's best to get verification from sources that can be trusted.

[Silverhair]

63. For snap judgements you will be more accurate using

Occam's Razor and Carl Sagan's famous statement, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

So if W says he ate bacon for breakfast, I'm not going to worry about it and will assume that he did eat bacon, unless I have a good reason to doubt it.

When he says that we need to attack another country then we have ener the area of extraordinary claims, and the bar of proof must be far far higher.

On claim of a fast trip to Bdad and back, since that is easy to do, and too easily shown to be false if it was false, then I was able with confidence to accept it.

Logic is really a wonderful tool.

[OldSoldier]

103. It's logical to assume Bush went to Baghdad

Because that's what Bush would do: take a fairly low-risk trip into Iraq, tell three thousand lies along the way, pretend he cares about the peons who are dying for him, and prance around like some kind of conquering hero on the front page of every newspaper in the world.

[Cooley Hurd]

35. What I wrote was a theory, however the WH has a track record...

...of making shit up, Because of their lack of integrity, my theory becomes plausible.

I might be wrong, but I don't trust a word they say anymore...

[Silverhair]

Your theory runs afoul of Occam's Razor. n/t

[Cooley Hurd]

64. Actually, I didn't run afoul...

The WH's penchant for lies, especially when it comes to the miserable situation on the ground in Iraq, makes any theories as to the truthfulness of the details of Saddam's capture valid. So, when building my theory, the first thing I had to do was was look at the inconsistencies of the story, factor in the WH's track record for lying, and draw the conclusion that the story could be false - most likely false.

[Silverhair]

69. What evidence can you show for your theories? Accusation

is not evidence.

[Silverhair]

32. Let's suppose he was gassed, for the sake of arguement.

It would not be a poison gas as the pictures don't show our troops in protective gear. But let's suppose it was some sort of incapacitating gas, like tear gas, pepper gas, or vomit gas. There are also gasses that do cause disorientation. (There is even a gas that makes brave men into cowards. No I don't have a link. I am remembering some articles from experiments in the 1950's. It was discontinued because it also had the curious ability to make cowards into brave men. I remember watching this film of a gassed cat that was terrified of a mouse.)

So which is more humane? Take a chance on a gunfight and kill Saddam & maybe some of our guys. Or gas him? USA police routinely use gas for submission of violent offenders.

So even if we did use gas to get him out - IT WASN'T A BAD THING. It may have avoided gunfire.

That being said, I don't believe gas was used. Saddam's behaviour can be easily explained as prolonged sensory deprivation.

[Sufi Marmot]

53. Whatever it was it wasn't "nerve gas"...

...as traditionally defined. Nerve agents such as VX, Sarin, and Tabun are hella lethal, and Saddam wouldn't have come out of the hole alive. Period. Was he maced? I have no idea, although the "before" picture, (Saddam with the Santa beard) they showed in my local paper (the Vancouver Sun) had him with very red eyes - the irises and pupils were almost completely red, so it wouldn't surprise me if they used pepper spray or something similar on him...

-SM

[Silverhair]

57. Agreed, and entirely possible. n/t

[nomaco-10]

42. I'm just wondering who's holding the ...

film of the Suddamn capture ala Private Jessica Lynch's "daring" rescue. I guess the Pentagon is holding it back for our future viewing pleasure, like when buzzard brain's poll numbers take a nose dive again.

[Silverhair]

51. Whatever you think of the film of her rescue, it does establish

some truths, from which other things may, if needed be duduced. However, that hasn't been any controversy over the fact that she was removed from the hospital in that manner. The controversy is over wherther or not that was needed. The film can't speak to that.

[Cooley Hurd]

58. But she wasn't "rescued," she was retrieved...

The Iraqi soldiers weren't at the hospital when the coalition forces showed up. The film crew was there to specifically film "a daring rescue." A rescue that never took place...

Gosh, aren't you sick of all the lies? I am...

[Silverhair]

66. OK, retrieved. You are correct on that. I was simply reffering to

it as it is commonly called. In any case, the video still is usefull for establishing the facts that it filmed, and for anything that can be logically infered from that. For example, there is no fighting filmed, and since it would be in the Army's interest to show fighting if there had been any, I can infer that there was no fighting.

Since the troops at the hole aren't wearing protective gear, I can conclude that gas wasn't used.

When Saddam was first announced as captured, I knew that the story was too easy to verify or prove false, so I didn't bother myself with the kind of doubt that you saw around here for awhile.

No I don't believe everything that W says. I am selective as to when I turn on the doubt.

[interceptor]

52. No.

Not even close. a.) We have no nerve agents outside of the continental US (and those are being destroyed), and b.) We're not even allowed to use pepper spray in most cases! Who came up with this one?!? And as Silverhair already pointed out, if there were nerve agents being used, how come the soldiers weren't in full NBC gear?

Jeez, if you believe this one, I have a bridge in San Francisco to sell ya...

[thebigidea]

54. what about the valium gas Rummy is experimenting with?

[Silverhair]

61. You still have to protect you own troops.

It doesn't do any good to use any type of happy gas, if you don't protect your own troops from the effects of the gas. Since the troops weren't wearing protective gear, logic suggest that gas wasn't used.

Of course, that arguement requires that the reader be able to follow logic.

[thebigidea]

62. I'm not talking about the capture, I'm talking about us using gas

there were some articles relatively recently about a new valium gas they are working on.

But since you're on the subject: so you've seen footage of them pulling Saddam Hussein out of the hole? How do you know they weren't wearing protective gear?

Can you give me more priceless Logic 101 bits of wisdom, while you're at it? Occam's Razor, boy - I never heard of that one at all. Thanks for the breakthrough!

[Silverhair]

67. Occam's razor is almost a thousand years old.

Basically it says that the simplist explanation that covers the known facts is the one most likely to be true.

Here is a link: http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/OCCAMRAZ.html

You really should learn it. It will be live changing.

Mark that it says FACTS, not opinions or suspicions.

[thebigidea]

68. I was being sarcastic. This is common knowledge, hardly esoteric

The constant harping on and on about it was getting tedious.

To which your response will be: "Forgive me for assuming you didn't know what it meant, as your complete lack of LOGIC led me to believe you weren't familiar with concepts straight out of a community college logic course."

To which my response will be: "Snicker."

Anyway, its good that we have advocates for Truthful Dubya over here. Keep up the good work!

[Silverhair]

72. For someone who knows it you certainly violated it quite a bit. n/t

[thebigidea]

73. what "violations" are these? Are you confusing me with someone else?

I simply don't believe a word out of Dubya's mouth. Including "Good" and "Morning."

Thankfully, you can do all the believing for me. So it balances out in the end.

[Silverhair]

77. I am selective as to when to believe, and when to disbelieve.

You appear not be be, and automatically disbelieve, and in doing so you lose the ability to accuratly judge events. Consider that you are no suspecting, for no logical reason, that Saddam was gassed.

The reasons for not believing that he was gassed are two.
1. Symptoms are easily explained by sensory diprivation, and we do know that Saddam was in a sensory diprivation status.

2. To use gas your own troops have to be protected with NBC suits. Even with happy gas, you need to keep it from effecting your own troops.

3. In a small confined space, ANY gas can be lethal due to oxygen displacement. Saddam was captured alive.

Simpliest explanation is that no gas was used. Logic is wonderful. Try it sometime.

[thebigidea]

79. nope, I never suspected ANYTHING about this

The gas thing? Immaterial. I could care less. I'm talking about trusting Dubya, about trusting Rumsfeld. After Jessica Lynch, after the OSP, after his Ministry of Disinformation - well, their word ain't worth shit.

So how is your selective trust different than my selective trust? Oh! That's right - you're Silverhair, you're automatically BETTER than me because you know about Occam's Razor. Silly rabbit, Trix are for kids!

[Silverhair]

80. You accused me of always believing W. I felt the need to point

out that sometimes I do and sometimes I don't. I base that on logic and evidence in the particular situation.

In this case, I seed no reason to invent any elobrate theories. The guys in the fouth finally found him, and it happened when it happened. I don't see anything fishy so far.

And the gas thing fails for lack of evidence and also for definate evidence that gas was not used.

That isn't defending W, or automatically believing him every time. It is just a realization that Saddam finally got caught. It had to happen sooner or later.

[thebigidea]

81. sigh

"I base that on logic and evidence in the particular situation."

Yes, but do you base it on logic? And should I try it sometime? And how does Occam's Razor fit into this?

"In this case, I seed no reason to invent any elobrate theories."

Have I?

What theories did I come up with?

"I don't see anything fishy so far."

This whole war wasn't fishy? The WMD thing?

"It is just a realization that Saddam finally got caught. "

Really? Tell me more about that. Apparently they found him in a spider hole. Can you tell me what a spider hole is, and then explain Occam's Razor again? I'm really thinking about trying logic sometime, and you're just the feller to set me on the straight and narrow.

[interceptor]

113. NBC gear is obvious

Think big, green rubber suits, gas masks, and gloves. If you saw them walk by you wouldn't think "gee, I wonder if he had his NBC gear on?"

[TomNickell]

105. That's not "Nerve Gas" n/t

[Don Claybrook]

56. Did you me 'we', American citizens

Or did you mean 'we' to include our erstwhile puppet, Saddam Hussein? Because he certainly had lots of nerve agents in Iraq (outside the United States), and we certainly supplied him with all the special ingredients to make them.

Then, of course, there's the question of how you've come to believe or know that we (US citizens, in this case) have no nerve agents outside of the US. How did you conclude that?

Thanks.

[interceptor]

71. Don't be silly

First off, no, we did not supply him with ingredients for nerve agents. If you had read the Congressional reports referred to but not expounded upon by Michael Moore, you would know what he did get (which were not intended for weapons use, a conclusion of the report). Frankly, he didn't need that much help, the guy only built a friggin nuclear reactor without aid from us, after all.

Second, I know because its my job as a military officer, and even then its not a big secret. The closest thing we have is pepper spray, which we don't use on military adversaries because it "may" run afoul of the Geneva Convention. Oh sure, we're able to crush the rest of the world's militaries put together with one arm behind our back...but really, we keep a bunch of crap we don't want to use in reserve to pull one bad guy out of a hole (never mind it'd kill him). And we keep a military of 1.3 million people (including 18 year old kids fresh out of boot camp) in on the secret, with nary a leak. Sure.

Do you bend to everything the (haha) Saudi media tells you? What do you think nerve agents do to people? For one thing, he wouldn't be in our custody, he'd be pushing up daisies. For another, those guys wouldn't have just walked up without full suits and chatted with him. Hell, we wouldn't touch him without scrubbing him through decon if there were some kind of nerve agent present (assuming he lived).

[thebigidea]

89. geezus, that's delusional!

"Oh sure, we're able to crush the rest of the world's militaries put together with one arm behind our back..."

you really believe that?

[tkmorris]

96. Look, I doubt he was gassed myself but......

1) You claim to be a military officer and are saying, with your bare face hanging out, that you are certain we have no nerve agents outside CONUS. You are either lying (which FWIW I don't think you are) or you really don't know much about our weapons programs, above or below boards. We don't admit that we have any such thing over there of course but even you should realize that that doesn't make it so. We don't admit we have spies in Israel either but umm....

I just erased a bunch. This discussion isn't worth it. You either know better or you know there is a ton you don't know. Either way your statement re nerve agents rings hollow, and it also happens to be false.

2) You then go on to proudly exclaim that the American military machine could whup the combined might of the rest of the world with one hand tied behind its back. Um, ok, can I have a shot of what you're having? We spend more than anyone else by far and I personally believe with competent leadership we can easily take any one nation no matter who it is but we don't have that competency at the moment and you said combined anyway. I'll give you this: we could nuke the rest of the world back to the Pre-Cambrian era. That's about it.

Do carry on with the discussion though, I'm going to make popcorn.

[thebigidea]

97. yes, but he has SECURITY CLEARANCES! He knows EVERYTHING!

Disregard the newspapers, even the words of Rumsfeld himself - this guy is practically G.I. Freakin' Joe!

[Don Claybrook]

106. Read for comprehension

I never have bended to anything the (haha) Saudi media has told me. It's been covered in 4 or 5 posts.

And I see that your answer regarding how you know the US doesn't maintain nerve agents outside the US rests on the basis of believing what your government tells you to believe. I have my answer. Thank you.

[nomaco-10]

65. Was he gassed.....

this is probably something else we'll never know. There were no film crews from CNN anywhere near the capture sight. Remember the CNN reporter that said his crew filmed the special ops returning to base and high fiving each other and said he figured something was up, but didn't know what. We don't know what went on. Nerve gas is probably a poor choice of words, we have dozens of gases availiable that do many, many strange things and I'll bet Rummy has just been dying to use them on somebody. I know for sure that a reporter(CNN) said that the ops had pepper spray, but could not confirm if it was used.

[interceptor]

74. What gasses

Exactly what "gasses" do we have available? Pepper spray is far, far from nerve gas, and the only thing even somewhat similar I stocked as a weapons officer.

[thebigidea]

75. things have changed since your time in service, apparently.

do a google search.


US Plans for Use of Gas in Iraq

(Austin and Hamburg, 7 February 2003) - Top US military planners are
preparing for the US to use incapacitating biochemical weapons in an
invasion of Iraq. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, revealed the plans in February 5th testimony before the US House Armed Services Committee. This is the first official US acknowledgement that it may use (bio)chemical weapons in its crusade to rid other countries of such weapons.

Rumsfeld stated that plans are being made for multiple applications,
including use of gas or aerosols on unarmed Iraqi civilians, in caves, and on prisoners. Rumsfeld reiterated the confusing, typical US official language about so-called "non-lethal" biochemical weapons. Rumsfeld described applications of a "riot agent" that clearly imply the complete incapacitation of victims, combatant and non-combatant, in armed conflict - a definition and usages that are at odds with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). Rumsfeld acknowledged US ratification of the CWC but expressed "regret" about its restrictions, stating that the US has "tangled
ourselves up so badly" on policy for use of incapacitating biochemical
weapons.

[nomaco-10]

82. I watched a documentary on PBS...

a few months ago about the different types of gasses that had been developed over the years. They interviewed a retired scientist that worked for the government living in Az, (I believe Az) that said they had developed a gas they could put a whole village to "sleep" for hours and wake up without and lasting side effects, other gasses that temporarily paralyze, kill within seconds, etc. Riveting show, real Star Wars stuff, they'd been developing and perfecting the use of gas for the last 60 years.
I only mentioned pepper spray because it was specifically mentioned in a report I saw on CNN the other day, I am fully aware of what pepper spray is and what is does. lol

[interceptor]

86. I'd believe that...

from the Ike or JFK administrations. Things got pretty straightforward later on, especially after Carter and Congress put a damper on a lot of secret squirrel stuff.

[thebigidea]

88. uh.. straightforward later on? uh... Reagan/Bush years? Uh?

[interceptor]

92. whatever

Believe Google if you want...the vast repository of information so classified, even the military doesn't know.

[thebigidea]

93. what are you talking about? This was discussed in the Armed Services Comm.

US plan to strike enemy with Valium

Pentagon scientists aim for future battlefield victories with the aid of tranquillising drugs and GM bugs

Antony Barnett, public affairs editor
Sunday May 26, 2002
The Observer

American military chiefs are developing plans to use Valium as a potential weapon against enemy forces and to control hostile populations, according to official documents seen by The Observer.

The development of these 'non-lethal' weapons angers campaigners who claim that they would breach international treaties on biological and chemical weapons.

--

"the vast repository of information so classified, even the military doesn't know."

as if they're going to tell YOU everything.

Loose lips sink ships!

[tkmorris]

98. Precisely

"Even the military doesn't know." That is exactly right. The vast majority of the military has no idea what special weapons are available if the need arises. They don't need to.

[interceptor]

114. Sure.

Because we just pull secret weapons out of our arse at the last minute, with no training or qualifications. And there really were nuclear weapons on my ship. Even though I was the weapons officer and hand-identified every missile, I just "don't know these things." We can put a Tomohawk through a window to pick somebody's nose over 900 miles away, but we need some kind of "special sauce" for a "real" fight. Sure.

These are the reasons people think we're conspiracy freaks and discount our opinions.

[nomaco-10]

91. Yes, it was during the era of the cold war....

We just "disposed" of a bunch of Anthrax that was stored in Alabama this summer. I can't remember exactly what the documentary said, but I'm pretty sure it was said that we had just a shade over 5 tons of Anthrax stockpiled in the US. Scary ain't it?

[interceptor]

85. Riiiiight, Google...

First of all, riot agent = pepper spray, not nerve agent. My wife carries the same thing sometimes. Second, "on prisoners?" Uh, no. Thanks for Googling, but I get my information on chemical weapons straight from the source, which are among other things the people actually carrying out these operations. I could also Google up a site that says Saddam was really a Pleiadian plant if you'd like...whatever. I'm an active duty officer now...and searching for WMD (among other things) being smuggled was my job not too far back.

[thebigidea]

87. its not about pepper spray. valium gasses are being fiddled with

like the stuff they used in that Russian theatre.

Just pointing out that you're wrong. But feel free to prove me wrong with some kinda link.

love and kisses,
bright guy

[interceptor]

90. Oh sure

Why is it that civilians are always trying to tell me they know more than me because they read it off the internet? :P What do *you* do for a living?

Sure, I'll give ya a link, but you'd need a classified-side computer to check it. Let me know when you get your clearance...

[thebigidea]

94. security clearance? ULTRAVIOLET.

Yeah, as if I'm going to believe everything a guy with 43 posts says over the Washington Post, the NY Times, and the Observer.

"What do *you* do for a living?"

I'm a super-sekrit superspy with so many security clearances, I'm considered a security risk. i have my own theme music, and a car with that releases smokescreens. Of course, you don't know about it - your security clearance isn't NEARLY high enough.

Not only do I know EVERYTHING about valium gas, I'm on it right now.

[interceptor]

115. That

That would explain a lot, certainly.


Ooooohhhh he has more posts than me, drat!

[tkmorris]

99. LOL

Why is that people come to this board and assume that everyone here is an unemployed actor, a sales clerk, or a welfare Mom?

You'll find that quite a few of us know exactly what we are talking about and horse droppings get sniffed out very fast. But have one on me, it aint all bad.

:beer:

[interceptor]

116. Thanks

I don't assume that. Its just that the vast number of conspiracies assigned to the military are pretty asinine. Like 1.3 million of us are just "in" on it and no one really knows :)

[RBHam]

70. The most amount of gas I've seen is from the media...

You'd think that with Saddam's capture, it's all duckies and bunnies.
Bush was justified. The economy is recovering. Go shopping and start investing in Ponzi schemes. Laugh and rejoice, we have defeated the evil Lord Sauron and Middle Earth is saved! ....

but, remember....

The War On Terror goes on...

The Evil Osama still lurks...

Waiting for his chance to strike again...

When the reality of the continuing quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan, and when the "jobless economy" is revealed as a sham, and the slavish Corporate media are worried about whether the great George W Bush will follow in his father's footsteps and be a one termer...

Just before the next election...

[Yupster]

76. My favorite Saudi press story

was last year when the daily paper Al-Riyadh printed the story about how Jews on Purim use real children's blood to make their holiday pastries. And that must be true because Bush says it isn't.

[thebigidea]

78. so by that logic, we can dismiss the entire American press because of FOX

the Washington Times, the NY Post, etc.

[Frangible]

83. This is silly

It's CS nerve gas, relatively harmless. Don't let words scare you. I have a container of CS gas and OC pepper spray on my keychain. My watch has tritium gas for lighting, which is also used to boost nuclear bomb yields. I guess I'm a giant walking WMD.

Our troops should be applauded for using non-lethal means of capturing Saddam instead of just shooting him. Killing is the easy way out.

If you take away these non-lethal tools that people use, guess what? They get shot instad. Do you really want them to get shot instead of having their eyes tear up?

[nomaco-10]

84. Maybe it is silly, but I happen ...

to think it is a valid discussion. Of course they wanted him alive, after the fiasco of Uday and Qusay, what a "messy" business that was. I have no idea what happened in that farmhouse hovel he was holed up in with a spider hole for hiding, but then again this is the bush* administration we're talking about.
I do know one thing, he was described and pictured as incoherent, disoriented and cooperative, especially for his dental visit and scalp exam, now all the reports say he is defiant and uncooperative, one military spokesperson called him a "wiseass". Pretty big mood swing in a less than 24 hr. period. Drugged maybe?

[DoNotRefill]

102. Nerve gas my ass....

no way in hell. He wasn't twitching NEARLY enough for nerve gas to have been used and an antidote administered. And if there was no antidote used, he looked awfully good for being dead.

[TomNickell]

104. No Way, Jose....

"Nerve gas"?

No. Causes convulsions, copious secretions that clog airways. Very small quantities are lethal. NASTY stuff. The antidotes aren't terribly effective.

They may have used some kind of gas but not nerve gas.

[Skinner]

109. "ITAR-TASS reported Monday, citing Saudi press."

So, this came through a Bulgarian website, which is citing a Russian news agency, who cited "Saudi press".

This is a pretty serious allegation. Sure would be nice to know who this "Saudi press" is, what they said, and how they know it.

I would expect a little more information on a serious allegation like this. The extreme lack of supporting information makes me extremely skeptical.

[Blue_Chill]

111. Bush sold 100 Iraqis to aliens in exchange for Saddam

Bush denies this so it must be true. Wake up people stop believing the lies!!! I don't need proof, the fact that Bush has lied in the past is proof enough. This alien conspiracy needs to be exposed so Bush doesn't get a chance to implant chips in our heads and force us to watch the 700 club!

[tom_paine]

112. Link doesn't work and it sounds like BS

For reasons already stated well above. Especially the part about no MOPS gear worn by the soldiers.

This is utterly uncorroborated by any source. Any other links?