If President Obama wants to send a message against the use of chemical weapons; why doesn't he

[Vincardog]

Rally Congress to pass a law OUTLAWING the manufacturing them?

Wouldn't that be a better use of his time than agitating to continue the neocon's wars of aggression?

[polichick]

1. How about closing these labs too:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023582867

[Vincardog]

2. Could it be that there is too much MONEY to be made by pursuing them?

[polichick]

4. Yes - it's our taxpayer money going for such creepy purposes...

and Americans are down wind of all this stuff. Horrible.

[Marrah_G]

17. USAMRIID at Fort Detrick does alot of important work with infectious diseases

It was once a bioweapon lab but now it does alot of important work with WHO and CDC, etc.

I know that there is always the chance that secret programs might be going on, but I hate to see scientists who do inportant and very dangerous work to help others be lumped into the chemical weapons argument.

When a monkey quarantine outside DC had a problem with airborne Ebola in monkeys (unbelievably scary, fortunately it was limited to monkeys and not humans) it was USAMRIID that answered the call there. They also do testing from all sorts of outbreaks all over the world. Level 4 labs are no joke.

Viruses and the people who work on them have been a topic of great interest to me since the loss of a friend during the swine flu pandemic.

[blkmusclmachine]

3. .

.

[VanillaRhapsody]

5. It wont be a message:

it will be against the chemicals and means to deliver them...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23946071

[Vincardog]

6. That article presupposes the necessity for the US to do SOMETHING about this alleged use of CW.

Where was that need when Saddam attacked the Kurds with the Chemical weapons Rumsfeld sold him?

[VanillaRhapsody]

7. that was before Obama...

thats where...

[Vincardog]

8. We were still the worlds moral authority and policeman.

[VanillaRhapsody]

9. Because we are the only ones with the technology to do anything...

thats why.,...

WE are the ones that have been trying for over a decade to design methods to neutralize chemical weapons...

[Vincardog]

11. That misses the point which is "Why are we still manufacturing Chemical Weapons?".

[bhikkhu]

14. We're not, and it has been against internation law since 1925.

For a period during the cold war the Soviet Union was manufacturing and stockpiling chemical and biological weapons, and the US followed suit. The nuclear arms race was worse, but that's all long past. All of the stockpiles on both sides have either been destroyed or are scheduled to be destroyed within a few years (its much easier to make it than it is to get rid of it).

[VanillaRhapsody]

22. the US is scheduled to eliminate all chem weapons in 2017

[Dragonfli]

21. Now you think Obama was Lying when he told us all he intended to send said "message"?

Obama may think punitive killing will somehow teach the lesson of morality to the world or it may simply be the latest justification being used to continue the PNAC agenda that still has Syria and Iran on it's list, but I don't think he is lying about his goal of sending his symbolic dick waving "message of death".

You are brave IMO to imply that he is lying, I give you that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

23. Yeah that message is that those chem weapons are gone POOF!

and anyone else who tries pulling that stunt can expect the same treatment.

[Dragonfli]

25. LOL, you are becoming most entertaining, keep it up little hawk, you have a place here

[VanillaRhapsody]

26. Not a hawk...

just think that the 2% of the worlds countries that haven't signed the treaty to eliminate chemical weapons might need persuading to do so...

98% of the world has signed it...Syria is one of the 2% haven't.

[Dragonfli]

27. Humanitarian hawking is the best kind, those we kill can sign treaties for instance...

[VanillaRhapsody]

29. so as an accused hawk...would I have to have supported every war or not?

[VanillaRhapsody]

30. and if wanting the world to eliminate chemical weapons makes me a hawk...so be it...

We seem to have been making HUGE inroads in eliminating them altogether...so if supporting that makes me a hawk...then so be that too.

[Dragonfli]

32. No, you are doing just fine, hawks need only support the war of the moment and the idea

that Killing people is the best course of action (often but not exclusively with bombs).

You don't even have to be a chicken hawk to be a war hawk, that is just a sub classification for those that will not be doing the killing themselves but use proxy warriors to shed the sweet blood for them (chicken hawks like to watch on TV).

I imagine you are a warrior however and will have at least some role in your preferred methods of killing. You are aren't you?

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. I don't care for killing nor...

and indiscriminate bombing...I want measures taken to attempt to prevent loss of life. But understand that there are no guarantees. I have opposed others because those leading the charge were most decidely NOT in any way concerned about loss of life as the previous administration was. This is not THOSE guys...

and you damn skippy...I know how to fight.

[Dragonfli]

39. Judging by the sheer number of your posts advocating killing (bombs kill they don't spread love)

I'd say you care a great deal for killing.... I'd even say by the volume you are obsessed with it!

It is good that you know how to fight, the recruiter will be pleased that your training will be that much less difficult.

I am excited for you in your decision to enlist, I hope you find the glory you seek and get to spray some blood around (hopefully by following honorable orders)

So tell me, which branch have you chosen to join?
Judging by the policies espoused by both parties now, it appears they will continue to keep us active in the ME on a permanent basis so I am sure you will see plenty of action.

At least you have decided to put your own life where your war mongering mouth is, I appreciate that, if enough of you killers for peace join then some of the more innocent kids may not have to serve so damn many tours to achieve the hawk agenda and so have a better chance of getting out with some of their sanity still intact.

Good luck and thank you for your service (I mean that most sincerely)

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. Not advocating killing....Advocating removing the Chemical Weapons from the world...

all but 2% have not signed the treaty...Assad being one of them.

I also don't like it when Anarchists try and pretend to be Democrats. They are as anti-govt as the Libertarians...and that is the truth.

[VanillaRhapsody]

10. ARe you unaware:

The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons and their precursors. Its full name is the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction

The main obligation under the convention is the prohibition of use and production of chemical weapons, as well as the destruction of all chemical weapons. The destruction activities are verified by the OPCW. As of January 2013, around 78% of the (declared) stockpile of chemical weapons has thus been destroyed.[5][6] The convention also has provisions for systematic evaluation of chemical and military plants, as well as for investigations of allegations of use and production of chemical weapons based on intelligence of other state parties.
As of June 2013, 189 states are party to the CWC, and another two countries (Israel and Myanmar) have signed but not yet ratified the convention.[

[Vincardog]

12. visit this link

[link:http://www.alibaba.com/manufacturers/chemical-weapons-manufacturer.html|

[VanillaRhapsody]

13. alibaba.com?

the place you go to buy stuff online? Seriously dude

How bout you grok this:

The CWC was ratified by the Senate that same month. Since then, Albania, Libya, Russia, the United States, and India have declared over 71,000 metric tons of chemical weapon stockpiles, and destroyed about a third of them. Under the terms of the agreement, the United States and Russia agreed to eliminate the rest of their supplies of chemical weapons by 2012. Having not meet their goal, the U.S. government estimates remaining stocks will be destroyed by 2017.[citation needed]

[lumpy]

18. You have to be kidding

[idwiyo]

15. K&R

[lumpy]

19. How would Congress be able to pass a law outlaw the manufactoring of chemical weapons in

other countries ?

[jazzimov]

20. That particular message has already been sent

NOT just to stop manufacture, but to DESTROY existing stockpiles. And NOT just by Congress, but by 98% of the WORLD in 1993.

Interestingly, Syria was part of the 2% of the world that did NOT sign this agreement.

[VanillaRhapsody]

24. apparently Assad needs a little help eliminating them!

he seems to have too much...they seem to be burning a hole in his pocket..

[jazzimov]

33. apparently! Look if you had

an "ace in the hole" that could be a game-changer in keeping all the power and money you're used to enjoying adn you have no compunction about the innocents that will certainly be killed, wouldn't you try it?

Now, consider the added repercussion - if I do this, I could lose any potential advantage.

[VanillaRhapsody]

35. He could pull a Saddam and just let everyone think he had them!

Saddam seemed to be doing pretty well with that bluff for a while...

[bhikkhu]

28. They did sign onto the 1925 Geneva Protocols in December of 1968

...a little late, but they did sign on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Protocol scroll down the list of member countries.

The later Chemical Weapons Convention has more restrictions and more detail, but the original international agreement is in no way unclear - it prohibits the use of chemical weapons against either military or civilian targets, and Syria agreed to it.


...but, on edit, my reading comprehension fail. Of course you are right - the CWC requiring the destruction of chemical stockpiles, Syria never agreed to that.

[KittyWampus]

31. Because Assad already has stockpiles and is going to us them.

[bigwillq]

34. Just stop. Obama knows more than all of us.

Stay calm, or something like that.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

36. It didn't help that the British were supplying the chemicals to Syria after the conflict started!

ouch

[MrMickeysMom]

38. K&R

I can't believe it, but we appear to be standing at the edge of choosing that road.

He's going to need our help to choose the correct path... it's the only one left, I believe in all my heart.

[hack89]

41. You are several decades behind the times

America committed to destroying their entire stock of chemical weapons a long time ago in accordance with UN treaties outlawing chemical weapons.

[Vincardog]

42. What difference would that make if companies keep on making more?

[hack89]

43. The precursor chemicals for chemical weapons are ubiquitous through the industrial world

because they have many other uses besides making chemical weapons. The jump, for example, from pesticides and herbicides to chemical weapons is small.

No one is manufacturing Sarin or Mustard gas.