Our Allies... the Germans

[Venom]

And yet this story still refuses to draw attention from anyone.

[Bereta_Eder]

Germany probably didn't want to scare you

[Venom]

If Germany was trying to be scary all of Europe would have already surrendered.

[Ted Striker]

Interesting.

Now the mystery of what's REALLY happening is starting to unfold.

Way to go Schroeder. Scheissekopf.

[Ned]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Germany probably didn't want to scare you

True. The whole would might be panicked if the Germans had told the world what they know.

In fact, why aren't they panicking now? Is there something we do not know about the spread of small pox? AFAIK, it is contagious and deadly. The Roman Empire was decimated by it.

In the US, only the health workers are being vaccinated. Is this the right procedure if the Germans are planning to vaccinate their entire nation?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ned
Dr. Strangelove, What I think is going on is that the German government knew that Saddam had supplies of human smallpox virus and disclosed this information only when it was asked for justification for funding for an additional 100 million vaccination packages. In other words, the German government was preparing its people for a small pox attack even while withholding the information that might have prompted other governments across the world to themselves stockpile the vaccine. This could lead to millions of deaths outside Germany if Saddam attacks using small pox because they will not be prepared as is Germany.

I believe that withholding this information from the world while pretending that Saddam has no WoMD is criminal. It would have been more honest of Germany to simply tell the world that Saddam intended to use small pox if attacked and that if we must attack, that we should not do so until every nation has the proper amount of vaccine available.

So how did Camel pox figure in all this? Has Iraq been acquiring both? 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?

[Ted Striker]

Yeah I mean it makes no logical sense for them to be working with camel pox. What are they trying to do, kill off the camels in Iran?

[SpencerH]

No one has reported that Iraq definitely has smallpox. The Germans knew (but didnt tell) that Iraq has been working with camel pox virus. There are three reasons for this:

1. They want to protect their camels
2. They are trying to make the canel pox virus more lethal to humans.
3. They are using camel pox virus to acquaint themselves with methods for small pox use.

The germans think that its number three (with the implied threat that the Iraqis have smallpox). Thats why they're stockpiling vaccine.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Ned

True. The whole would might be panicked if the Germans had told the world what they know.

In fact, why aren't they panicking now? Is there something we do not know about the spread of small pox? AFAIK, it is contagious and deadly. The Roman Empire was decimated by it.

In the US, only the health workers are being vaccinated. Is this the right procedure if the Germans are planning to vaccinate their entire nation?

The smallpox vaccine is very unsophisticated. In part thats what makes it so effective, but it also has a high risk of side effects. Some of those are fairly mild but there is risk of death from the vaccine.

Because of the vaccine side effects, the plan here is one of disease containment rather than prevention AFAIK. Whether that would work is just a guess but the alternative that the Germans have chosen is politically incorrect here (and maybe rightly so).

[CerberusIV]

Am I the only one who noticed that the original article also referred to labs in NK and Russia having this stuff. I would be more worried about terrorists buying smallpox virus from the Russian mafia than being given a free sample by Saddam.

Eurobash all you want but Bush isn't talking about war with NK or threatening Putin with military action if the Russians don't sort out their act. Which leaves the real US motive on Iraq open to question.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
Am I the only one who noticed that the original article also referred to labs in NK and Russia having this stuff. I would be more worried about terrorists buying smallpox virus from the Russian mafia than being given a free sample by Saddam.

We know Russia maintained smallpox and weaponized it. As for NK, its speculation whether it has smallpox stocks. Its not impossible that many countries maintained some (hidden away). France was recently mentioned as a good possibility of that.

Eurobash all you want but Bush isn't talking about war with NK or threatening Putin with military action if the Russians don't sort out their act.

NK is not Iraq. NK is what Iraq will be if we dont do something before he has nukes and/or missiles with sufficient accuracy and range to reach Europe. The Russians have proved over the last 50 years that they are not irrational with respect to the balance of power. Saddam Hussein, on the other hand, has shown a willingness to wage war and use chemical weapons on large scales.

Which leaves the real US motive on Iraq open to question.

These comments from people both sides of the atlantic continue to amaze me. If not the stated motive, what is it you think is the motive? Oil? Thats a laughable red herring. A deep seated need by GW to avenge his fathers victory as the leader of the coalition? The american desire to rule the world, starting with a middle east ****-hole?

Please, I'd like a cogent answer (that wasn't addressed to you personally CerberusIV).

[CerberusIV]

I don't really want to get into that argument in this thread since that wasn't the original subject. Let's just say that I can accept politicians who are opportunistic ****s, like the german chancellor, as that's what 'normal' politicians usually are. I am deeply, deeply suspicious of politicians like Bush and Blair who are claiming a moral high ground to justify their actions.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by SpencerH


These comments from people both sides of the atlantic continue to amaze me. If not the stated motive, what is it you think is the motive? Oil? Thats a laughable red herring. A deep seated need by GW to avenge his fathers victory as the leader of the coalition? The american desire to rule the world, starting with a middle east ****-hole?

Please, I'd like a cogent answer (that wasn't addressed to you personally CerberusIV).

It is, to some extent, all the reasons we have been given, but with different motivations then they like to say.

It is about WMDs, the USA is trying to stop countries from aproaching a level where they are even remotely on the same level as the USA. The USA has probably the most WMDs in the world. They are trying to build missle shields, biological detectors and all sorts of ridiculous things while going around and blowing up anyone who starts developing the same sort of weapons. They are keeping a grip on their global dictatorship.

It is about Saddam being a dictator, in that he isn't a pro-US dictator. The USA's history with installing brutal dictatorships and some of their current allies such as Saudi Arabia are evidence that they do not want a regime change for moral or ethical reasons. (Besides, the people of Iraq have it pretty well off compared to some of their neighbouring countries in the region.)

It is about bringing "stability" to the middle-east, in that they are making it a better atmosphere for Israel, and possibly a bit less anti-american. (officialy speaking, anyways)

The only things that I don't see as playing a very big role, except to gain added support on one side or the other, is oil and terrorist connections. (although I'm sure they do have a very minor part in it aswell)



Also, if what they are telling us is truly the complete and honest truth, why do they continue to make up new reasons and justifications every week? (such as the al-qaeda connections)

I can't say I know for certain why they are going to war - all I know for certain is that they aren't telling us the real reasons why.

[Ming]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
Let's just say that I can accept politicians who are opportunistic ****s, like the german chancellor, as that's what 'normal' politicians usually are. I am deeply, deeply suspicious of politicians like Bush and Blair who are claiming a moral high ground to justify their actions.

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

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Ming

THEY ARE ALL DOING THE SAME THING...

Accept that the german chancellor isn't trying to start a war...