Science News Forum - SciScoop
Home ¦ Join SciScoop ¦ Sections ¦ Categories ¦ Contact ¦ FAQ ¦ Links ¦ Sci-Art ¦ Search...

Now online: 12 Anonymous(s) and       SciScoop membership: 3784. Total stories since November 2002: 2795

Search SciScoop
 

Section Stories
The stories that didn't quite make it to the Front Page...

A Constant's Secrets. A Different Look at Planck's Constant
by deanlsinclair
Commentary::Physics

Everspin release new MRAM products for Consumer Applications
by mertero
News::Technology

No Flash for Seagate Moving to Next-gen Memory Direct
by mertero
News::Technology

GE shows a glimpse into the future of lighting [OLEDs]
by mertero
News::Environment

Lose Stomach Fat, Get Six Pack Abs
by sciencebase
Reviews::Medicine

Science Fair Projects E-Book Download
by sciencebase
Site News::Potpourri

Free Computer Information Resources
by sciencebase
News::Announcements

Humble Pie To The Back Burner
By rickyjames, Section Commentary
Posted on Thu Nov 20, 2003 at 03:20:59 AM PST

Announcements The U.S. Department of Defense is officially backpedaling on whether or not a secret memo provided to Congress links Saddam and Osama as working together. Also, Editor and Publisher is stating that several newspapers and other media outlets (including SciScoop) had "egg on their face" for running with the story, originally promoted by the Weekly Standard and New York Post. Leaked reports from the CIA are practically a dime a dozen these days, including one a source calls a "bleak assessment that the resistance is broad, strong and getting stronger" that "says we are going to lose the situation unless there is a rapid and dramatic change of course". Which supposedly prompted Paul Bremer's sudden return to a Washington huddle and the subsequent Bush Administration about-face on turning Iraq over to the Iraqis ASAP. Geez, this latest plan-with-48-hours-of-thought-behind-it sounds like Vietnamization on amphetamines to me, complete with Cambodian parallels. It's worth remembering how THAT turned out, and I hope we don't get so anxious to end this latest American adventure that we let it happen again. What I STILL wanna know is, where are the WMDs that threatened America?

Update [2003-11-22 5:34:10 by rickyjames]: Now the U.S. Army is stating that American troop levels in excess of 100,000 will be required in Iraq through March 2006.

Humble Pie To The Back Burner | 12 comments (12 topical, 0 hidden)

It depends on how you define WMDs (4.00 / 1) (#2)
by Sylvia Engdahl on Fri Nov 21, 2003 at 09:35:39 PM PST
What I STILL wanna know is, where are the WMDs that threatened America?

I suspect that they were, or still are, where you said biological weapons might be in Biowarfare as a Science Project -- in small labs that could be easily hidden or quickly destroyed. (And the CIA memo to which you linked in that story is official.) I don't think that prospect is too far in the future to be concerned about; it is quite likely that more has been known for quite a while than could be publicly stated, and certainly Saddam was investigating it, given his record of using poison gas on his own people.

As far as that goes, though I'm sure you're more knowledgeable about nuclear weapons than I, personally I don't think it's far-fetched to assume that one or more could be built by terrorists in secret -- they wouldn't need a whole bomb factory. (Years ago Tom Clancy wrote a novel in which this happened, just as he wrote a novel in which a commercial jetliner was purposely crashed into a building; he seems pretty accurate in imagining possibilities that the public wants to believe couldn't exist outside of fiction.)

It all depends on how one defines "mass destruction," I guess. To me, and to many people, killing off the population of just one major American city would be "mass destruction" -- would we really want to wait around for enough destructive power to destroy our entire nation to be developed? Did our 20th-century fears of a confrontation with the Soviet Union desensitize us to the point where anything short of all-out nuclear warfare isn't considered a threat?

Sylvia

Visit my Space Subsite! New material added recently!



"Meanwhile, in Britain,... (none / 0) (#1)
by Sweetwind on Thu Nov 20, 2003 at 05:35:39 AM PST
(from today's Borowitz Report - 2nd para from bottom)
Meanwhile, in Britain, President Bush defended the decision to go to war in Iraq, saying that Vice-President Dick Cheney had found new intelligence linking Saddam Hussein to obesity.




William Safire on the Osama/Saddam link (none / 0) (#12)
by Sylvia Engdahl on Wed Nov 26, 2003 at 11:43:35 AM PST
William Safire's syndicated column today commented on the discovery of links between Saddam and al Qaeda, saying that, "with so much connective tissue exposed ... the burden of proof has shifted to those still grimly in denial." This column, titled "Missing Links," can be found in the NY Times for Nov. 24 (you have to register to read it online, but that's free).

Safire refers to the article "Case Closed: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden." and you should also read the rebuttal to the Defense Department's "official backpedaling" in response to that article, "The Saddam-Osama Memo (cont.)"

Safire concludes, " Intrepid journalists will ultimately bring the full story of the Saddam-bin Laden connection to light. In the meantime, the F.B.I. should stop treating 9/11 as a cold case."

Sylvia

Visit my Space Subsite! New material added recently!



Humble Pie To The Back Burner | 12 comments (12 topical, 0 hidden)

Bookmark this story with del.icio.us Digg this story Furl this item Have you Reddit?

Login
Username:
Password:


Register Now Why join?

SciScoop Support

Related Science Links
· Scoop
· officially backpedaling
· egg on their face
· we are going to lose the situation unless there is a rapid and dramatic change of course
· turning Iraq over to the Iraqis ASAP
· Vietnamiza tion
· Cambodian parallels
· how THAT turned out
· where are the WMDs that threatened America
· U.S. Army is stating
· More on Announcements
· Also by rickyjames

All trademarks etc are owned by their respective companies
Comments are copyright individual "Poster" and opinions expressed are not necessarily those of individual members of the SciScoop Community. Site ©2002-2008 SciScoop.