While the United States only has Nuclear
weapons and thus views biological and chemical
attacks as WMDs, it was directly implied by the
White house and state department that it was
nuclear weapons they went in to get, not
chemical.
Saddam used chemical weapons on his own people, so not only do we know he had them, but he used them in more than just a test, so Thief's point is completely valid.
The Iraqi threat was never nuclear in nature.
While the United States only has Nuclear
weapons and thus views biological and chemical
attacks as WMDs, it was directly implied by the
White house and state department that it was
nuclear weapons they went in to get, not
chemical.
"Directly implied" is a fucking oxymoron. Go eat some jumbo shrimp and watch women's sports while you directly imply.
And your post has nothing to do with anything. Iraq used WMDs in a real attack, which is far more serious than North Korea not using them in a test.
You listen to shitty music.
You're right I've had to put up with shit music
for two decades now.
An AEGIS cruiser can't shoot down something moving that fast. Hitting a target in the launch phase is much easier but 80,000mph for re-entry is far too fast. An ICBM re-enters at close to 16,000mph and there's a lot of skepticism that even they can be shot down accurately. The Soviets used nuclear tipped ABM's for interception around Moscow.
I'm sure it's possible in a really far-fetched, got real lucky sort of way.
Last edited by Gohron; 05 Apr 2009 at 04:53 PM.
Bookmarks