Our Allies... the Germans - Page 4

Lefty Scaevola · February 19, 2003, 10:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove Why would it bother with Camel pox, or is ti that what Iraq actually has is the Camel pox virus, which it may be trying to render into something that infects humans?

Camel pox has indentical culture and hadling charactoeristic to small pox. To develope safe and effective mothed of hadling, growing, manufacturing, and weponizing smallpox weapons, you experiment and practice on camelpox, which does not not kill you own ass when screw up or try the wrong technique.

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 10:55

So the german government knows that Iraq might have a stock of smallpox virus. This leads to a lot of gloating here... because ?

Ming:

"One is anti war because he is against war without justification, and the other two feel the justification is there. But you can accept the german chancellor, but not the other two.
THEY ARE ALL DOING THE SAME THING..."

So Bush and Blair IYO do not believe in the reasons they give for the war?

DinoDoc · February 19, 2003, 10:57

Quote:

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
So the german government knows that Iraq might have a stock of smallpox virus. This leads to a lot of gloating here... because ?

If the story is true, why clamor for a smoking gun they already know exists?

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 11:00

Because the question whether it is true should be subject to verification, eg by the inspectors in Iraq ? Or do you think the BND has definite proof?

DinoDoc · February 19, 2003, 11:04

Quote:

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
Because the question whether it is true should be subject to verification, eg by the inspectors in Iraq ?

If that's true, why hide the information if the facts of the article are correct?

CerberusIV · February 19, 2003, 11:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming

Typical... All three are claiming the moral high ground to justify their actions. One is anti war because he is against war without justification, and the other two feel the justification is there. But you can accept the german chancellor, but not the other two.

THEY ARE ALL DOING THE SAME THING...

So I think your biases are showing

There is one tiny difference. Bush and Blair genuinely believe they are morally justified. That worries me as to how far they are prepared to go. It isn't a big step from 'we will save them' to 'we will kill them to save them' Schroeder is just being a politician and will say whatever it takes to stay in power and so is influenced by public opinion.

Ming · February 19, 2003, 11:05

There must be a reason WHY they are buying Millions and Millions small pox vaccinations. That's not something you do without proof

GePap · February 19, 2003, 11:06

That surprising article and all the info about it appeared in the NYTimes about 2 weeks ago: were have you people been?

I find it so amussing that all of a sudden, this becomes proof of German perfidity. Has anyone in Europe claimed that Saddam doesn't have WMD? Please, someone bring up the quote were the German government has stated that they don't think Iraq has WMD: I would like to see it.

Some of you are thick. Let me put it simply: there are many of us who do not think war is necessary, no matter how many WMD Saddam has: again, let me repeat, so you understand: Knowing that Saddam has WMD, some of us don't think the war is necessary.

Do I need to say it a third time?

CerberusIV · February 19, 2003, 11:09

Smallpox is a credible threat, regardless of source, so governments need to be seen to respond.

DinoDoc · February 19, 2003, 11:11

Quote:

Originally posted by GePap
Has anyone in Europe claimed that Saddam doesn't have WMD?

There is the German/French cry for a "smoking gun." That is wholly unrelated to your and to a lesser extent my objections toward the upcoming war.

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 11:12

"If that's true, why hide the information if the facts of the article are correct?"

I don't understand the question. The information, whatever it is exactly, got out via the Bundestag. The intelligence details are of course not released. And what "facts" are correct?

"There must be a reason WHY they are buying Millions and Millions small pox vaccinations. That's not something you do without proof"

Most governments have been doing this, based on a possibility, not a certainty. You never plan for the worst case scenario until you're sure about it?

DinoDoc · February 19, 2003, 11:15

Quote:

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
I don't understand the question.

Quote:

The German government suppressed evidence of small pox virus arsenals in Iraq for months, fearing such news could undermine Chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder's re-election campaign

Why hide the information if it must be confirmed by inspectors?

Ming · February 19, 2003, 11:17

The point here is that the Euro's have been asking for the smoking gun, and they already had it. Germany seems to think it's such a credible threat, they are desperate to buy 100 million vaccinations... And they didn't bother to tell anybody for political reasons.

Sad... so very sad...

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 11:19

The whole re-election argument is strange. Saddam has the trust of about 1 % of the german population, so I fail to see how this would have influenced public opinion - be it definite proof, or just evidence pointing to the possibility.

GePap · February 19, 2003, 11:22

This is a smoking gun? Again, this "news" made the paper two weeks ago: if it were a smoking gun, would not Powell have included it in his report? I mean, if the press can find out about it, you would think the CIA would...or hope they would. If thgis were a smoking gun, the Bush admin. would be all over it.

These guys are Germans.. what ever happened to the stereotye of the fastidiuos German bureocrat? I guess only some stereotypes are worth mentioning at a time.

And of course, if the Germans see such a huge threat from Iraq, why no mass sale of Gasmasks-after all, the chemical threat is a vastly more real one.

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 11:23

"The point here is that the Euro's have been asking for the smoking gun, and they already had it."

And you are so sure about this because.. ?

"Germany seems to think it's such a credible threat, they are desperate to buy 100 million vaccinations..."

"desperate" ? Where do you get that from?

"And they didn't bother to tell anybody for political reasons."

That's extremely difficult to tell. If they tried to hide the information, however, then why did it show up in budget deliberations as a government paper? Government leaks usually take a different route.

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 11:25

"would not Powell have included it in his report?"

Good question. However circumstantial the evidence may be, it would still be better than pasting a 10 year old uni thesis...

General Ludd · February 19, 2003, 11:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming
There must be a reason WHY they are buying Millions and Millions small pox vaccinations. That's not something you do without proof

The USA and many other counties have been doing this ever since all of the fear mongering after 9/11.

Sava · February 19, 2003, 12:02

small pox for camels is a smoking gun? Ming... I sometimes wonder about you

Ming · February 19, 2003, 12:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Osweld
The USA and many other counties have been doing this ever since all of the fear mongering after 9/11.

True... but the timing here is a "tad" suspicious, don't you think.

And again, Sava, you didn't answer the question. What legitimate reason is there for having it... I wonder about you sometimes

Sava · February 19, 2003, 12:20

Despite the Germans' problems, I don't think that this discussion answers any of the questions on why the war in Iraq is justified or not. I'm not simply against the war because I'm a hippie peacenik... Here are my reasons for being against the war.

1. 100 billion dollar+ price tag
2. American lives at risk
3. Hatred towards America it will spawn
4. Possibility for sparking a greater conflict
5. Possibility of Saddam launching a WoMD against someone before he dies
6. Bush's motives
7. What happens to Iraq afterwards

I'm not convinced that the end result of going after Saddam is worth the price we are going to pay for the war. It's a results vs rewards situation for me. Anytime a politician wants something like this so bad, I get suspicious.

And attacking Germany's credibility (whether they have a leg to stand on or not) doesn't help answer any of these questions. It just distracts people's attention from the real issues we should be discussing. And it's obvious that the Bush admin loves these distraction tactics.

BTW, it's nice to know you care

Ming · February 19, 2003, 12:24

This thread isn't about whether the war is justified.

It's about the Germans holding out on information because it was in their political best interest.

They got caught with their pants down, and their spin control doctors have been trying to do the best they can with it. Hmmm... Kind of like some of the people here...

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 12:29

"It's about the Germans holding out on information because it was in their political best interest."

I'm not convinced about that in this case. Where they did that was for example with the budget debacle.

I'm still not sure what gives you so much gloat material about the politics as usual.

Sava · February 19, 2003, 12:30

we need a :sigh: smiley...

Quote:

Kind of like some of the people here

I hope you're not talking about me. I really don't care about the Germans, I'm not a German fan, I've never used their objection to the war AFAIK as an argument against it. And I certainly am not about to spin away this issue for the Germans. Everybody has skeletons in their closet in terms of Iraq. But if you're going to open this can of worms, it's only fair to look at all parties involved and compare the skeletons in the closet in relation to historical dealings with Iraq.

But I won't even do that, because it doesn't contribute to the overall topic (which this is related to).

Velociryx · February 19, 2003, 12:39

Bottom line:
Germany and France have been screaming for proof of WOMD since day one.

Germany knew all along that such weapons existed, and in fact, regarded it as enough of a threat to order 94MILLION additional doses of the vaccine against it.

They conveniently "forgot" to tell the rest of the world this lovely little detail...all the more convenient for them, specifically because it IS the proof they have been clamoring for.

If there was no percieved threat, there would be no need to bulk up on vaccinations.

OTOH, if there's enough of a threat to bulk up on vaccinations, then there IS pretty compelling proof of WOMD's.

Given that Germany HAS, in fact, bulked up on its vaccinations, it was holding its left hand out demanding proof that the right hand was already holding (behind its back, of course).

-=Vel=-

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 12:53

"Germany knew all along that such weapons existed"

That's quite plausible, just for other reasons. Do you really think such knowledge is required to stock up on vaccine?

"They conveniently "forgot" to tell the rest of the world this lovely little detail..."

You can't be sure about it. They might well have shared the intelligence (evidence, not necessarily proof) under the condition that it is not used politically - which might also explain why Powell did not rely on it.

"all the more convenient for them, specifically because it IS the proof they have been clamoring for."

Why are you always assuming "proof"? Am I misunderstanding the english language as to what "evidence" is, and what "proof" is?

"OTOH, if there's enough of a threat to bulk up on vaccinations, then there IS pretty compelling proof of WOMD's."

I can't follow that logic.

"it was holding its left hand out demanding proof that the right hand was already holding (behind its back, of course)."

That, again, is very likely, just for other reasons, not this overhyped smallpox story....

Velociryx · February 19, 2003, 12:59

HO - Not much need to stock up on vaccines against a disease that hasn't reared its ugly head in quite some time. Further, to make such a dramatic increase (and no matter how you slice it, 6m to 100m IS a dramatic increase), would require a heightened level of percieved threat. You don't just one day decide...."hey! we need to make a nearly 20-fold increase in the Smallpox vaccine!" Just doesn't happen without a reason.

The logical conclusion, therefore, is that where there is smoke, there is fire. If there is that dramatic of an increase, it follows that there is a percieved threat of the virus surfacing.

Given the recent surfacing of this information, is it really all that hard to put 2 and 2 together and get 4?

-=Vel=-

Ozz · February 19, 2003, 13:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Velociryx
Germany knew all along that such weapons existed, and in fact, regarded it as enough of a threat to order 94MILLION additional doses of the vaccine against it.

Drug companies sure do well, make the danger, make
the antidote.

Velociryx · February 19, 2003, 13:06

Ozz! Don't get the conspiracy theorists started! Next thing you know, we'll be hearing about how the Oil Cartels are in cahoots with the BioTech companies, and *they're* the ones secretly masterminding the whole thing!

-=Vel=-

HershOstropoler · February 19, 2003, 13:08

There's a general increase in the real or percieved threat of bioterrorism or biological warfare. "a heightened level of percieved threat" can be based on a heightened possibility of such stocks in Iraq. Or North Korea. Or out-of-control stock in Russia.

The whole story is quite murky, you're clutching at straws to make the case that Germany knows about Iraqi bio and chemical weapons. There's no need for this. All western intelligence services should have a relatively good idea about those. A lot of stuff for this was provided by the west, after all. And they should have a good deal of information from the 91 war, inspections and dissidents.

"Germany knew all along that such weapons existed" - Yes, I think so.

So?