Their range of the weapons is irrelevant. A breach of a contract is a breach of a contract. UN officials said it did not immediately appear that the munitions were accounted for in Iraq's 12,000-page declaration of its arsenal last December 8, an omission that could represent a breach of security council resolutions. A minor or a major infraction is yet an infraction. Do the crime, do the time. Rationalization of the facts of a violation just shows the intention of Wild....and a minimization of the range of the weapons is a subtle attempt to support Saddam. If there is a minor infraction by the Americans, in his mind it is front page news....and requires damnation and immediate action. It is this kind of bias that is the hallmark of a small minded, closed minded thinker. Typical of the costant propaganda machine known as Wild. My advice? Disregard Wild.
Frm Washington Times 1/17/03 The benchmark for judging Saddam's compliance with U.N. disarmament edicts is the 1998 final report of the U.N. inspection team. That team reported huge discrepancies in the weapons components it positively identified as having been produced and Iraq's denial that they ever existed or Iraq's assertion that it destroyed such articles. Some of the weapons components identified by the United Nations but not found, according to the 1998 report, were four tons of VX nerve gas, 550 artillery shells filled with mustard gas, components to make three or four nuclear weapons devices, up to 50 Scud ballistic missiles and 157 bombs filled with germ agents.
Perhaps Wild practices cut and paste, because he really doesn't understand what the authors of those articles are saying. Anyone who cannot read an op ed piece, digest it for themselves, and speak or debate from their level of understanding without referring to other's opinions of the issues is just a common footsoldier, side/goosestepping the real issues.