380 TONS of explosives go missing..In Iraq

[transplant99]

Heads are gonna roll over this one.

Who's watching the fort?

Wonder where Hussein got this stuff from in the first place as well?

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by transplant99@Oct 25 2004, 05:32 PM
Heads are gonna roll over this one.

Who's watching the fort?

Wonder where Hussein got this stuff from in the first place as well?

While I like the premise of invading Iraq in the first place, I don't think there's anyone left who wouldn't agree this administration has created many of its own problems in the way its managed the aftermath.

This being the latest example.

Cowperson

[Resolute 14]

Dont worry. Given Bush's track record of finding weapons, I have no doubt this will be recovered in no time....

:::Runs and hides in bomb shelter:::

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I thought you were watchin' the ammo dump? No, I thought you were watchin' the...

How the hell do you let THAT happen?

You wonder where it came from? I would think from the same places that have been arming him for the last 20 years?

Something interesting is that HMX is also used in rocket fuels, so this large stash could have been for use with those nasty aluminum cylinders, that were thought to be for fuel rods, in the manufacture of rocket powered missles and delivery systems.

[calculoso]

Originally posted by transplant99@Oct 25 2004, 11:32 AM
Wonder where Hussein got this stuff from in the first place as well?

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein acquired HMX and RDX in the late 1980s, in an effort to build a nuclear bomb.

Late 80s.... Anybody probably could have sold it to them, including the US.

U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was informed within the past month that the explosives were missing, the report said. It's unclear if U.S. President George Bush was informed.

I'd certainly hope that Bush was informed. It may not have been up to Bush to directly put someone in charge of the place, but I'd hope that they'd let him know that something seriously wrong has happened.

I agree though. Someone's head is going to roll for this one. 40 truck loads? It's not possible for that amount to just disappear...

[FlamesAddiction]

That much explosives do not just "go missing". I would bet anything that money exchanged hands.

Wonder where Hussein got this stuff from in the first place as well?

Could have been from a number of nations. From the story, it sounds like these conventional explosives were remnants from before the 1st Gulf War.

[calculoso]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 25 2004, 11:55 AM
Something interesting is that HMX is also used in rocket fuels, so this large stash could have been for use with those nasty aluminum cylinders, that were thought to be for fuel rods, in the manufacture of rocket powered missles and delivery systems.

Is this a hint of an admission that Saddam's ability to create WMD was greater than thought a couple months ago?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by calculoso+Oct 25 2004, 05:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (calculoso @ Oct 25 2004, 05:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 25 2004, 11:55 AM
Something interesting is that HMX is also used in rocket fuels, so this large stash could have been for use with those nasty aluminum cylinders, that were thought to be for fuel rods, in the manufacture of rocket powered missles and delivery systems.

Is this a hint of an admission that Saddam's ability to create WMD was greater than thought a couple months ago? [/b][/quote]
No. There's a big difference between developing a rocket and delivery program and starting up a WMD program. I think Saddam was likely hoping to build his own weapons and these were components to a rocket program.

[arsenal]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Oct 25 2004, 12:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Oct 25 2004, 12:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Is this a hint of an admission that Saddam's ability to create WMD was greater than thought a couple months ago?

No. There's a big difference between developing a rocket and delivery program and starting up a WMD program. I think Saddam was likely hoping to build his own weapons and these were components to a rocket program. [/b][/quote]
So, would it be fair to say, that *IF* the sanctions had been lifted on Iraq, that Saddam would of used these weapons, technologies to start up weapons programs?

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by arsenal+Oct 25 2004, 06:25 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (arsenal @ Oct 25 2004, 06:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

No. There's a big difference between developing a rocket and delivery program and starting up a WMD program. I think Saddam was likely hoping to build his own weapons and these were components to a rocket program.

So, would it be fair to say, that *IF* the sanctions had been lifted on Iraq, that Saddam would of used these weapons, technologies to start up weapons programs? [/b][/quote]
I think the Duelfer Report, which concluded there were zero WMD in Iraq, also concluded that sanctions were only a few years away from failing and that once removed, the impetus was there to regenerate WMD programs.

The good and the bad for both sides of the argument.

Cowperson

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by arsenal@Oct 25 2004, 06:25 PM
So, would it be fair to say, that *IF* the sanctions had been lifted on Iraq, that Saddam would of used these weapons, technologies to start up weapons programs?

A conventional weapons program, yes. And every country has the right to develop conventional weapons programs, even under sanctions. But that is a long way from starting up a WMD program. I think people need to realize just how difficult it is to get a program like this going and sustain it. Once these products are created they have a definite shelf life, usually less than a couple of years. Unless you continue to keep them rolling off the line, they become usless in short order.

A chemical weapons system is likely the easiest to build and maintain. But a bio weapons program is next to impossible to start up without getting cultures from someplace first (US or Russia). Nuclear is obvious. It takes specialized equipment, people and materials. None of these are easy to get going and maintain with the world watching.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Did it ever occure to anyone that these are conventional explosives that any country can probably make? It's not as though they found plutonium that can only come from a few places, they found a pretty generic high explosive. That doesn't mean anyone was selling anything.

[transplant99]

Looks like those explosives were already gone from the facility when the Americans arrived....according to NBC.

One instance where embedded reporters have made a differance?





NBC News reported that on April 10, 2003, its crew was embedded with the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division when troops arrived at the Al Qaqaa storage facility south of Baghdad.

While the troops found large stockpiles of conventional explosives, they did not find HMX or RDX, the types of powerful explosives that reportedly went missing, according to NBC.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/26/...ives/index.html

[Flame On]

Didn't Bush just announce that Kerry was critisizing the military for this happening (a transparent sidestepping of the issue) that he doesn't back the troops? If they were stolen before the US turned up then Bush should appologise for his made up accusation and electioneering. Or he should come clean and say their admin once again dropped the ball. Either way he's wrong is he not?

[transplant99]

Originally posted by Flame On@Oct 26 2004, 10:39 AM
Didn't Bush just announce that Kerry was critisizing the military for this happening (a transparent sidestepping of the issue) that he doesn't back the troops? If they were stolen before the US turned up then Bush should appologise for his made up accusation and electioneering. Or he should come clean and say their admin once again dropped the ball. Either way he's wrong is he not?

Kerrys camp came out and hammered Bush because of this. Rightfully so at the time. New evidence suggests they were wrong however.

What was it Bush should apologize for? Responding to false accusations?

Both sides stepped in it this time.

[arsenal]

Why should Bush appologize for critisizing Kerry for blaming the military for weapons disappearing that they really had no control over.

How did the Bush admin drop the ball?

[Flame On]

Why should Bush appologize for critisizing Kerry for blaming the military for weapons disappearing that they really had no control over.

Basically because he didn't blame the military.
Because he blamed Bush's admin not the military. If he accused him of not having enough forces, that's an admin decision, not military. Still a valid point of contention.

[arsenal]

Only an Admin issue if the Generals on the ground don't ask for more troops. Military advisers have to ask for more troops before the administration can send them. Also, if the Iraqi army had not been disbanded (Military decision), they probably could of safegaurded the stock piles easier.

Mind you, I probably would not of trust the majority of the Iraqi army father than I could throw them

[Flame On]

The admin oversee the campaign or stratedgy of the larger picture, i.e the foreign policy. The generals run that stratedgy for them on the ground. If a general doesn't ask for something but the admin can see a hole, or a goal needed or something, is it not time for the Commander in chief to step in with leadership and say, here's more troops or what ever the case may be is?
I'm no expert, but I think if the admin sees they need to acomplish something, they don't (or shouldn't) wait idly by waiting for a busy general to ask for it. It's a combined effort surely.

[calgaryred]

Well after reading that article I sure feel like I can sleep easy at night.