Author Topic: How many have actualy read it?  (Read 481 times)

Offline JBA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1797
How many have actualy read it?
« on: October 19, 2003, 08:22:01 PM »
Heres the link and some snipps from David Kay's Iraqi report.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/kay-20031008.html

We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN. Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:
·   A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.
·   A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.
·   Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.
·   New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.
·   Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).
·   A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of  500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.
·   Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.
·   Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.
·   Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.
Let me turn now to chemical weapons (CW). In searching for retained stocks of chemical munitions, ISG has had to contend with the almost unbelievable scale of Iraq's conventional weapons armory, which dwarfs by orders of magnitude the physical size of any conceivable stock of chemical weapons. For example, there are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous


nuclear program, the testimony we have obtained from Iraqi scientists and senior government officials should clear up any doubts about whether Saddam still wanted to obtain nuclear weapons. They have told ISG that Saddam Husayn remained firmly committed to acquiring nuclear weapons. These officials assert that Saddam would have resumed nuclear weapons development at some future point. Some indicated a resumption after Iraq was free of sanctions. At least one senior Iraqi official believed that by 2000 Saddam had run out of patience with waiting for sanctions to end and wanted to restart the nuclear program

Several scientists - at the direction of senior Iraqi government officials - preserved documents and equipment from their pre-1991 nuclear weapon-related research and did not reveal this to the UN/IAEA. One Iraqi scientist recently stated in an interview with ISG that it was a "common understanding" among the scientists that material was being preserved for reconstitution of nuclear weapons-related work.
"They effect the march of freedom with their flash drives.....and I use mine for porn. Viva La Revolution!". .ZetaNine  03/06/08
"I'm just a victim of my own liberalhoodedness"  Midnight Target

Offline Tumor

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4294
      • Wait For It
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2003, 09:09:24 PM »
JBA

Give it up man, you won't please the "Amerika" hater's, or the "Dictator Bush" haters until they find a working 50 megaton nuclear device sitting in the Baghdad city square while a cloud of ricin laced mustard gas drifts over CPA headquarters.
"Dogfighting is useless"  :Erich Hartmann

Offline Godzilla

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2003, 09:23:40 PM »
What gets me is that the UN is the body that delcared Iraq in violation of the dissarmament agreements. It was the UN that said Iraq has failed to be forthwright about it's WMD programs.

What are we supposed to do, wait for ever until Iraq fully complies with 10,000 UN resolutions?

We did the right thing, and it wasnt just the USA that said Iraq had WMD....basically the entire UN and the security counsil did. The ONLY problem is that the UN are spineless worms and would never back up there resolutions.

Id rather be wrong about Iraq having WMD and rid Iraq of Suddam than do nothing, with the real possibility that Iraq had WMD and WMD programs.

Yes we did the right thing, too bad if some dont think so.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2003, 09:26:50 PM by Godzilla »

Offline Godzilla

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2003, 09:30:05 PM »
How is the UN going to enforce it's resolutions? By writing another one?

Sometimes war is the only option, too bad to say, but too true as well.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #4 on: October 19, 2003, 09:39:54 PM »
We should have demanded a UNSC resolution which said,

"If you do not comply, we shall taunt you a second time!"
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline JBA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1797
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #5 on: October 19, 2003, 10:34:31 PM »
Ya I can see how we wouldn't be able to find a few WMD's. It's not like its a desert or something..O wait it is exactly like a desert.


« Last Edit: October 20, 2003, 09:05:33 AM by JBA »
"They effect the march of freedom with their flash drives.....and I use mine for porn. Viva La Revolution!". .ZetaNine  03/06/08
"I'm just a victim of my own liberalhoodedness"  Midnight Target

Offline Godzilla

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2003, 10:49:09 PM »
Who cares? The UN said Iraq had WMD and the US went in, FINNALY, after the world community failed to act .

It's history, lets move on. The Iraqis will be better off without Saddam and the world can be assured Iraq poses no threat.... a job well done all the way around.

Offline Godzilla

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2003, 10:55:22 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
No you probably don't care if your government sent your soldiers to war on false premises. Hopefully others do.


What false premises? The UN said Iraq had WMD and did not comply with its dissarmament agreements.

The US went to war because Iraq NEVER complied with the cease fire agreements of the first gulf war. Its plain and simple.

On the other hand there are wars all over the world that are not justified....yet no one cries about those.

Offline Godzilla

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2003, 11:18:53 PM »
Quote
What false premises? The UN said Iraq had WMD and did not comply with its dissarmament agreements.


I said the UN dissarmament agreements.


What part of the outcome of the war are you opposed too?

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2003, 11:35:03 PM »
Godzilla, I recommend you actually read resolution 1441, as well as the other relevent resolutions, in ful, before you commenting on them.

Offline Gadfly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2003, 11:45:03 PM »
The daily, weekly, monthly and yearly wars on the African Continent.

Offline Godzilla

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
How many have actualy read it?
« Reply #11 on: October 19, 2003, 11:55:57 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
.

That's the short version, if you like the (very) long one, I suggest you search this BBS.


SO the AH BBS is a great source of information on the subject? Now I can begin to understand your ignorance.