Again, were these munitions you keep calling Weapons of Mass Distruction capable of massive distruction?
Sorry, I have no need to run around all over the board chasing down your stupidity and responding to it. I have answered your question with a few of my own, and you can't give an intelligent response. That's not my fault.
Let's say that 2% of the 500 degraded Sarin bombs made it into the hands of terrorists... that's 10 bombs... they managed to smuggle them across our open border with Mexico... entirely possible... the 10 bombs are detonated across America... New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, Atlanta, Miami, Denver, Cleveland, Seattle, and Washington D.C., in schools, malls, stadiums, civic centers, day care facilities, etc...
Because of the degraded state of the Sarin, they don't actually kill people, it just makes people sick, and injures a few residual bystanders... Are you going to consider them as harmless as Windex and Ammonia? Will it be like a minor rug burn? Will we all breathe a sigh of relief that we didn't spend the money on a war to insure these WMD's were destroyed?
If you have trouble answering, I fully understand. I know it's a difficult thing to have to ponder, and Al Franken hasn't told you how you should respond, so you take your time with it, and think about whether or not you would blame President Bush, if such a scenario occurred?
Spoiled meat can also make it sick. Perhaps upon finding that we can have clear consciences about invading a country. After all they could have shipped it over to NYC and had swarthy street vendors peddling it out to unwitting hungry people.
Dixies premise is silly. Those weapons found are less dangerous than conventional ordinance if this was a cache of c4 or napalm or something that is a conventional explosive or incendiary it would be far more dangerous to use against civilians than these spend weapons.
Yet no one would argue that discovery of conventional bombs indicates they are weapons of mass destruction. Its just a lethal weapon. There is a difference.
Because of the degraded state of the Sarin, they don't actually kill people, it just makes people sick, and injures a few residual bystanders...
Good.
So you agree they are NOT weapons of mass destruction
Dixies premise is silly. Those weapons found are less dangerous than conventional ordinance if this was a cache of c4 or napalm or something that is a conventional explosive or incendiary it would be far more dangerous to use against civilians than these spend weapons.
Yet no one would argue that discovery of conventional bombs indicates they are weapons of mass destruction. Its just a lethal weapon. There is a difference.
No, I am like Damo, I think "mass destruction" is a subjective term, depending on who you are talking to. I believe that if 10 degraded Sarin bombs went off in American schools and malls, it would be described as "mass destruction" here, perhaps it would be just another day, in Israel.
But it's nice to know that you wouldn't consider such a scenario as being "mass destruction" ...merely a minor inconvenience, having to treat kids for a few weeks in the hospital and such. It's nice to know that the prospects of terrorists using these degraded bombs to terrorize us, would not sway your opinion one bit, you'd still think of them as harmless and unworthy of our concern. Glad we could get that on the record!
No, I am like Damo, I think "mass destruction" is a subjective term, depending on who you are talking to. I believe that if 10 degraded Sarin bombs went off in American schools and malls, it would be described as "mass destruction" here, perhaps it would be just another day, in Israel.
But it's nice to know that you wouldn't consider such a scenario as being "mass destruction" ...merely a minor inconvenience, having to treat kids for a few weeks in the hospital and such. It's nice to know that the prospects of terrorists using these degraded bombs to terrorize us, would not sway your opinion one bit, you'd still think of them as harmless and unworthy of our concern. Glad we could get that on the record!
No, I am like Damo, I think "mass destruction" is a subjective term, depending on who you are talking to. I believe that if 10 degraded Sarin bombs went off in American schools and malls, it would be described as "mass destruction" here, perhaps it would be just another day, in Israel.
But it's nice to know that you wouldn't consider such a scenario as being "mass destruction" ...merely a minor inconvenience, having to treat kids for a few weeks in the hospital and such. It's nice to know that the prospects of terrorists using these degraded bombs to terrorize us, would not sway your opinion one bit, you'd still think of them as harmless and unworthy of our concern. Glad we could get that on the record!
You yourself said the degraded sarin wouldn't even kill anyone: just make them sick....that's not a weapon of mass destruction:
DIXIE: Because of the degraded state of the Sarin, they don't actually kill people, it just makes people sick, and injures a few residual bystanders...