Huge weapons cache found....

Sorry, which article? I don't see it and I even looked. I found articles in this thread for NavyTimes, Reuters, science.howstuffworks.com and the WashingtonPost.

Do you mean National Broadcasting Company has its own defense officer? (really, really confused!)

 

NBC is the modern term that used to be known as CBR. Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (the article left out the appropriate commas if I remember correctly.

 

"But Americans are killing Iraqi civilians (collateral damage) and slaughtering Iraqi insurgents."

Total (TOTAL) body count in Iraq is significantly less than what Saddam killed (including the body count of ALL parties - including accidents).

I believe that the difference is that some people wanted Iraqi CIVILIANS to be killed by Saddam.

Saddam's body count was over 50,000 executed. If memory serves me correctly over 50,000 civilians killed by poison gas. And if I remember correctly, over 100,000 Iranians killed by poison gas.

I do not justify warfare. However, warfare is the FINAL political solution.

 

Back to the weapons found, it is sad that there are still such large weapons caches. It is evident that the people are either afraid, or they do not consider the consequences of letting the terrorism go on.

 

The Navy Times article never did state it was the definitive report in explaining the nagging question of WMD. And last time the President addressed the Union, he answered that. Nobody got the WMD banner out anyway.

As for Iraq, the defense of their nation does not require 'conventional weapons'to be stored by being buried in the sand in plastic. And as stated previously (twice), the conventional weapons you seem so happy to let them have, will not be used on Americans in their preemptive strikes because we do not dwell in caves. So, a useless weapon for anyone to have. Unless of course you are going to use it on the civilian population...then you would have a use for it.

Are you thinking that its totally okay for them (the insurgents) to have it to use against the civilians? We, who support democracy, kind of frown on that.

What this is all about is that the insurgents are on the run. They have hidden what they could, quite hastily, so they wouldnt be caught with it.

Its not the Iraqis. Learn the distinction and youll be all the better for it. Does wikipedia have an "insurgent" entry yet? Ah there is still time.

Group Iraqis with Iraqis without distinction?

WHAT? Um, yeah, you are confused.

The insurgents that we (meaning me and a team of 8 personnel) handled, that still had a pulse and breath in their bodies - 158 of them to be exact - were not Iraqi. Most were Eqyptian. Some were from Yemen. And some, were Sudanese. Most of the dead ones were from Eqypt, although I didnt deal with them, that is what I was told. This is my personal experience.

The Iraqis are almost all non combatives (with exception of those in the Police or the Army).

And the guys who were pulled out of the pond? Kind of hard to tell who they were or what they did to end up like that, but at that point, it was past explanation.

I dont play cards. There just simply is no time for things like Go Fish and Crazy 8's.