Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Pekin, IL USA
    Posts
    700

    Thumbs down


    350 Tons Of Explosives MIA In Iraq
    VIENNA, Austria, Oct. 25, 2004


    Several hundred tons of conventional explosives are missing from a former Iraqi military facility that once played a key role in Saddam Hussein's efforts to build a nuclear bomb, the U.N. nuclear agency confirmed Monday.

    International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei will report the materials' disappearance to the U.N. Security Council later Monday, spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told The Associated Press.

    "On Oct. 10, the IAEA received a declaration from the Iraqi Ministry of Science and Technology informing us that approximately 350 tons of high explosive material had gone missing," Fleming said.

    In Washington, Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry's campaign said the Bush administration "must answer for what may be the most grave and catastrophic mistake in a tragic series of blunders in Iraq."

    "How did they fail to secure ... tons of known, deadly explosives despite clear warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency to do so?" senior Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart said in a statement.

    The Iraqis told the nuclear agency the materials had been stolen and looted because of a lack of security at governmental installations, Fleming said.

    "We do not know what happened to the explosives or when they were looted," she told AP.

    The explosives included HMX and RDX, which can be used to demolish buildings but also produce warheads for missiles and detonate nuclear weaponry. They disappeared after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq last year.

    60 Minutes Correspondent Ed Bradley reports the U.N. says it warned the U.S. government the munitions site might be looted shortly after the invasion. A White House spokesman today CBS News President Bush is determined to get to the bottom of what happened to the missing explosives.

    "This is a disaster almost anyway you look at it,'' terrorism expert Daniel Byman told Bradley. "Very dangerous stuff got out to very bad people. It would be hard to portray it in any way that isn't completely negative."

    Mr. Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, was informed of the missing explosives in the past month, the report said. It said Iraq's interim government recently warned the United States and U.N. nuclear inspectors that the explosives had vanished.

    "Upon receiving the declaration on Oct. 10, we first took measures to authenticate it," Fleming said. "Then on Oct. 15, we informed the multinational forces through the U.S. government with the request for it to take any appropriate action in cooperation with Iraq's interim government."

    "Mr. ElBaradei wanted to give them some time to recover the explosives before reporting this loss to the Security Council, but since it's now out, ElBaradei plans to inform the Security Council today" in a letter to the council president, she said.

    There was no immediate explanation for the discrepancy between the IAEA's figure of 350 tons and the newspaper's estimate of nearly 380 tons.

    Before the war, inspectors with the Vienna-based IAEA had kept tabs on the so-called "dual use" explosives because they could have been used to detonate a nuclear weapon.

    "This material was monitored and controlled by U.N. inspectors before the invasion of Iraq. Thanks to the stunning incompetence of the Bush administration, we now have no idea where it is," Lockart said. He demanded the White House explain "why they failed to safeguard these explosives and keep them out of the hands of our enemies."

    IAEA inspectors pulled out of Iraq just before the 2003 invasion and have not yet been able to return despite ElBaradei's repeated urging that the experts be allowed back in to finish their work.

    ElBaradei told the U.N. Security Council before the war that Iraq's nuclear program was in disarray and that there was no evidence to suggest it had revived efforts to build atomic weaponry.

    Al Qaqaa, a sprawling former military installation about 30 miles south of Baghdad, was placed under U.S. military control but repeatedly has been looted, raising troubling questions about whether the missing explosives have fallen into the hands of insurgents battling coalition forces.

    Saddam was known to have used the site to make conventional warheads, and IAEA inspectors dismantled parts of his nuclear program there before the 1991 Gulf War. The experts also oversaw the destruction of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons. A recent report by U.S. inspectors concluded that Saddam had neither stockpiles of any illegal weapons nor active programs to produce them.

    The nuclear agency has no concrete evidence to suggest the seals were broken, Fleming said, but a diplomat familiar with the agency's work in Iraq said the seals must have been broken if the explosives were stolen.

    Concerns over the security of former nuclear sites in Iraq has arisen before. In April, the IAEA reported that some Iraqi nuclear facilities appear to be unguarded, and radioactive materials were being taken out of the country.

    Separately, the Los Angeles Times reported that 2,500 barrels of uranium that could be used to produce nuclear weapons had been left unguarded at the Tuwaitha nuclear research center site for several days following the withdrawal of Iraqi troops.


    A vote for the shrub is a vote for incompetence!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Coastal Georgia
    Posts
    34,902
    Only a Hand Job like you would post a story that was proven a joke on the day the NYT ran it. Try reading the other post on this. http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?threadid=63147

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    3,913
    Originally posted by James 3528
    Only a Hand Job like you would post a story that was proven a joke on the day the NYT ran it. Try reading the other post on this. http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?threadid=63147
    Or How About This One Motornuts: (you created it and it was debunked vastly by Bootlen)

    Link>>>> -http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?threadid=63193

    And Major Debunking

    {Originally by Bootlen rubbing Motorbreath's face in it)

    NBCNEWS: HUGE CACHE OF EXPLOSIVES VANISHED FROM SITE IN IRAQ -- AT LEAST 18 MONTHS AGO -- BEFORE TROOPS ARRIVED

    The NYTIMES urgently reported on Monday in an apprent October Surprise: The Iraqi interim government has warned the United States and international nuclear inspectors that nearly 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives are now missing from one of Iraq's most sensitive former military installations.

    Jumping on the TIMES exclusive, Dem presidential candidate John Kerry blasted the Bush administration for its failure to "guard those stockpiles."

    "This is one of the great blunders of Iraq, one of the great blunders of this administration," Kerry said.

    In an election week rush:

    **ABCNEWS Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 4 Times
    **CBSNEWS Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 7 Times
    **MSNBC Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 37 Times
    **CNN Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 50 Times

    But tonight, NBCNEWS reported: The 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives were already missing back in April 10, 2003 -- when U.S. troops arrived at the installation south of Baghdad!

    An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003, one day after the liberation of Iraq.

    According to NBCNEWS, the HMX and RDX explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived.

    The TIMES left the impression the weapons site had been looted of its explosives recently, and since Iraq has been under US control.

    The TIMES reported: "The huge facility, called Al Qaqaa, was supposed to be under American military control but is now a no man's land, still picked over by looters as recently as Sunday."

    [In a fresh Page One story set for Tuesday on the matter, the TIMES once again omits any reference to troops not finding any explosives at the site when they arrived in April of 2003. Attempts to reach managing editor Jill Abramson late Monday were unsuccessful.]

    "The U.S. Army was at the site one day after the liberation and the weapons were already gone," a top Republican blasted from Washington late Monday.

    The International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors last saw the explosives in January 2003 when they took an inventory and placed fresh seals on the bunkers.

    Dem vp hopeful John Edwards blasted Bush for not securing the explosives: "It is reckless and irresponsible to fail to protect and safeguard one of the largest weapons sites in the country. And by either ignoring these mistakes or being clueless about them, George Bush has failed. He has failed as our commander in chief; he has failed as president."

    A senior Bush official e-mailed DRUDGE late Monday: "Let me get this straight, are Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards now saying we did not go into Iraq soon enough? We should have invaded and liberated Iraq sooner?"

    Top Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart fired back Monday night: "In a shameless attempt to cover up its failure to secure 380 tons of highly explosive material in Iraq, the White House is desperately flailing in an effort to escape blame. Instead of distorting John Kerry’s words, the Bush campaign is now falsely and deliberately twisting the reports of journalists. It is the latest pathetic excuse from an administration that never admits a mistake, no matter how disastrous."




    Hey, motor. Read it and weep!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    3,913
    Originally posted by motorboy1

    350 Tons Of Explosives MIA In Iraq
    VIENNA, Austria, Oct. 25, 2004



    Separately, the Los Angeles Times reported that 2,500 barrels of uranium that could be used to produce nuclear weapons had been left unguarded at the Tuwaitha nuclear research center site for several days following the withdrawal of Iraqi troops.

    By The U.N.


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Buffalo N.Y.
    Posts
    1,571
    The title of your post implies that now you might think Saddam had WMD's, would that be correct motormouth?

    Very interesting how you use the WMD's phrasing to fit your story line. I believe you may have just flipped-flopped and not even realized it.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Pekin, IL USA
    Posts
    700
    Originally posted by bobby7388
    The title of your post implies that now you might think Saddam had WMD's, would that be correct motormouth?

    Very interesting how you use the WMD's phrasing to fit your story line. I believe you may have just flipped-flopped and not even realized it.
    Sorry, you're wrong. The WMD'S thing was to be SARCASTIC. I'm sure you already know that but are trying to throw up the usual repug "smokescreen" of disinformation. I find it quite ironic that the shrub pre-emptively and wrongly attacked Iraq because of WMD's. Yet he allowed all those explosives to be stolen all because the shrub wouldn't listen to his own Generals and others advice when they said we needed more troops to secure the peace during the occupation.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    20,677
    Originally posted by motorboy1
    Originally posted by bobby7388
    The title of your post implies that now you might think Saddam had WMD's, would that be correct motormouth?

    Very interesting how you use the WMD's phrasing to fit your story line. I believe you may have just flipped-flopped and not even realized it.
    Sorry, you're wrong. The WMD'S thing was to be SARCASTIC. I'm sure you already know that but are trying to throw up the usual repug "smokescreen" of disinformation. I find it quite ironic that the shrub pre-emptively and wrongly attacked Iraq because of WMD's. Yet he allowed all those explosives to be stolen all because the shrub wouldn't listen to his own Generals and others advice when they said we needed more troops to secure the peace during the occupation.
    ================================================== ==========

    In the words of RRR, "There you go again." Posting things about which you have absolutely NO knowledge.
    No reserve. No retreat. No regrets.

    For those who have fought for it, freedom has a sweetness the protected will never know.

    http://www.airwarvietnam.com/16thSOSGunners2.jpg

    Proud member of KA Club

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Buffalo N.Y.
    Posts
    1,571
    Originally posted by motorboy1
    Originally posted by bobby7388
    The title of your post implies that now you might think Saddam had WMD's, would that be correct motormouth?

    Very interesting how you use the WMD's phrasing to fit your story line. I believe you may have just flipped-flopped and not even realized it.
    Sorry, you're wrong. The WMD'S thing was to be SARCASTIC. I'm sure you already know that but are trying to throw up the usual repug "smokescreen" of disinformation. I find it quite ironic that the shrub pre-emptively and wrongly attacked Iraq because of WMD's. Yet he allowed all those explosives to be stolen all because the shrub wouldn't listen to his own Generals and others advice when they said we needed more troops to secure the peace during the occupation.

    Good one, but again..... I don't buy it.
    You are trying to make a point by using the WMD issue in your subject line.
    So by referring to the missing explosives as WMD's negates your argument.

    And once again you have no absolute evidence of when these explosives disappeared, yet you insist on going the line of your beloved mentor, which by the way has no conclusive data either.

    Lets say for instance there were 500,000 boots on the ground and these explosives were an issue, what would be your argument then? numbers in and by themselves solves nothing.
    Are you going to try and argue that if we had more troops that these situations don't happen?

    You just don't know looking from the outside in, and until you sign on you will never have knowledge of how military operations work, you need to be inside to have a full 100% perspective.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event