Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Saurdaukar on June 11, 2004, 03:58:03 PM
-
Dont know **** about the source - any validity?
Things that make you go UGH! (http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_1.html)
The UNMOVIC report said Iraqi missiles were dismantled and exported to such countries as Jordan, the Netherlands and Turkey. In the Dutch city of Rotterdam, an SA-2 surface-to-air missile, one of at least 12, was discovered in a junk yard, replete with UN tags. In Jordan, UN inspectors found 20 SA-2 engines as well as components for solid-fuel for missiles.
-
They found the UPS tracking number ?
-
Oh man, if true won't that be a fly in the ointment to Kerry's campaign hopes?
-
Originally posted by straffo
They found the UPS tracking number ?
No...they used FedEx. I know because I have a brother who works for FedEx, and he told me so, so I know it's true.
-
Originally posted by straffo
They found the UPS tracking number ?
No, FedEx, and we're pretty sure the trail will end in Paris.
Edit: Damn you Slimm...
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Oh man, if true won't that be a fly in the ointment to Kerry's campaign hopes?
Kerry's already got more flies than ointment. One more won't make any diff.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
No, FedEx, and we're pretty the trail will end in Paris.
Edit: Damn you Slimm...
lol, edits are fun.
-
From the UNMOVIC report.
"6. The Commission’s experts are conducting an investigation in parallel with the IAEA Iraq Nuclear Verification Office regarding the discovery of items from Iraq that are relevant to the mandates of UNMOVIC and IAEA at a scrapyard in the Netherlands. In particular, following a visit of IAEA to a scrapyard in Rotterdam to investigate increased radiation readings, it was discovered, through photographs taken at the time, that engines of SA-2 surface-to-air missiles were among the scrap (see figure below). They are the type of engines used in the Al Samoud 2 proscribed missile programme. In addition, a number of items and equipment that may also be relevant to the UNMOVIC mandate were seen among the scrap. The existence of missile engines originating in Iraq among scrap in Europe may affect the accounting of proscribed engines known to have been in Iraq’s possession in March 2003. Both IAEA and UNMOVIC have kept the Security Council informed of this matter.
7. A team of Commission experts visited the site concerned in the Netherlands and examined one missile engine that had been salvaged from the scrap metal process. By comparing the serial production number on the engine with information in the UNMOVIC database, the experts were able to confirm that the engine was one from an SA-2 missile that had been tagged by United Nations inspectors in the past and had not been declared as having been fired. Representatives of the scrapyard company indicated that a number of similar engines (5 to 12) had been seen in the scrapyard in January and February of this year. More engines could have been processed and passed through the yard unnoticed. Company staff confirmed that other items made of stainless steel and other corrosion-resistant metal alloys bearing
the inscription “Iraq” or “Baghdad” had been observed in shipments delivered from the Middle East since November 2003. A number of items were examined and sampled on-site by UNMOVIC experts with a portable metal analyser and were
determined to be composed of inconel and titanium — both dual-use materials subject to monitoring. Photographs of other materials bearing Arabic script were taken.
8. Despite the active cooperation of the Government of the Netherlands and the company concerned, it was not possible to determine how many other engines and other material previously subject to monitoring in Iraq may have passed through this
scrapyard (or others). It should also be noted that the scrapyard that was visited by UNMOVIC deals in high-quality stainless steel. Items and equipment made of dualuse materials subject to the provisions of the monitoring plan may also be coming out of Iraq to other destinations. The Commission is continuing its investigation.
9. In addition, the Commission is aware from comparative analysis of recent satellite imagery that a number of sites previously known to have contained equipment and materials subject to monitoring have been either cleaned out or destroyed. An example of such imagery is provided in the appendix to the present report. It is not known whether such equipment and materials were still present at the sites during the time of coalition action in March and April of 2003. However, it is possible that some of the materials may have been removed from Iraq by looters of sites and sold as scrap."
http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/new/documents/quarterly_reports/s-2004-435.pdf
"Oh man, if true won't that be a fly in the ointment to Kerry's campaign hopes?"
I don't think so. You see before the coalition invaded UNMOVIC was monitoring the distruction of Al Samoud 2 missles.
"This brings to 40 the total number of Al Samoud 2 missiles destroyed to date."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/un/unmovic-030310.htm
But because of the invasion UNMOVIC had to pull out and the missles were no longer being monitored or secured. Apparently some (who knows how many) stolen/looted and then sold and/or transport out of Iraq.
If anything, I think this is the most glaring example of how the inspection process was succeeding in making the world an safer place, and how the invasion succeeded in making the world an unsafer place.
-
I think you're missing the point here Thrawn. These missiles, while destroyed, were not accounted for. Therein is clear evidence that Iraq (likely very recently) removed these weapons without documenting it. This proves that Iraq resisted the destruction of the required weapons until they realized their hand was about to be forced. As the inspectors stated, this could yeild a trail to their development programs. This news is not insignificant.
-
SA-2 (surface to Airmissile) is supposed to be WMD ?
:aok :rofl
-
Originally posted by lada
SA-2 (surface to Airmissile) is supposed to be WMD ?
:aok :rofl
Significant proof, lemme say that word again, PROOF, that Iraq was hiding the weapons it had agreed to destroy and not build.
I'll back up, it may be too early say proof yet, but here is why I think so: "They are the type of engines used in the Al Samoud 2 proscribed missile programme. In addition, a number of items and equipment that may also be relevant to the UNMOVIC mandate were seen among the scrap. The existence of missile engines originating in Iraq among scrap in Europe may affect the accounting of proscribed engines known to have been in Iraq’s possession in March 2003."
-
Originally posted by lada
SA-2 (surface to Airmissile) is supposed to be WMD ?
:aok :rofl
that engines of SA-2 surface-to-air missiles were among the scrap (see figure below). They are the type of engines used in the Al Samoud 2 proscribed missile programme
Take some time and read what was posted.
IIRC, the Al Samoud 2 was a Surface to Surface missle.
Oh, Almost forgot...
:rofl :aok
-
Iraq launched several missles at kuiwait during the invasion that were prohibited by the UN. That goes to show they were not in complience w/ 1441.
-
Wow!
If true this demonstrates just how patheticlly some people want to justify the invasion of Iraq.
So when Oly North gave simular Hawk missles to Iran was he giving them WMD now?
So Regan gave WMD to Iran then?
So Reagan was giving WMD to Iran and Iraq at the same time then? Iraq via Ruhmsfeld and Iran via Oly North..
This is signifigant. In a funny pathetic kind of way.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Wow!
If true this demonstrates just how patheticlly some people want to justify the invasion of Iraq.
So when Oly North gave simular Hawk missles to Iran was he giving them WMD now?
So Regan gave WMD to Iran then?
So Reagan was giving WMD to Iran and Iraq at the same time then? Iraq via Ruhmsfeld and Iran via Oly North..
This is signifigant. In a funny pathetic kind of way.
I posted this in another thread, you may want to read it?
http://www.state.gov/s/d/rm/17094.htm
-
btw did you see this Iron ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3801187.stm
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Wow!
If true this demonstrates just how patheticlly some people want to justify the invasion of Iraq.
Its interesting news, thats why it was posted.
You see, those of us that supported the action arent all that interested in "justifying" it to you. You dont count for much. :aok
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Therein is clear evidence that Iraq (likely very recently) removed these weapons without documenting it.
"Iraq" didn't remove these weapons. It happened after the Iraqi government was destroyed and the country was under CPA authority. Perhaps the site was destroyed by Iraqi or foreign insurgents or terrorists, but it happened while Iraq was under coalition control, not Bathist.
Check the dates on the satelite photos. May 28, 2003 (27 days after Bush stated that major combat was ended, the storage site and scrap are still there. Feb 22, 2004 the site is demolished and scrap is gone.
This proves that Iraq resisted the destruction of the required weapons until they realized their hand was about to be forced.
Not according to UNMOVIC briefing as I have explained above.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
"Iraq" didn't remove these weapons. It happened after the Iraqi government was destroyed and the country was under CPA authority. Perhaps the site was destroyed by Iraqi or foreign insurgents or terrorists, but it happened while Iraq was under coalition control, not Bathist.
Check the dates on the satelite photos. May 28, 2003 (27 days after Bush stated that major combat was ended, the storage site and scrap are still there. Feb 22, 2004 the site is demolished and scrap is gone.
Not according to UNMOVIC briefing as I have explained above.
So, according to what you are saying, the site was there when SH was in power, but since we've been there has been looted and shipped out?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
"Iraq" didn't remove these weapons. It happened after the Iraqi government was destroyed and the country was under CPA authority. Perhaps the site was destroyed by Iraqi or foreign insurgents or terrorists, but it happened while Iraq was under coalition control, not Bathist.
Check the dates on the satelite photos. May 28, 2003 (27 days after Bush stated that major combat was ended, the storage site and scrap are still there. Feb 22, 2004 the site is demolished and scrap is gone.
Not according to UNMOVIC briefing as I have explained above.
What happened after the Iraqi government was destroyed? The missiles were destroyed and sold as scrap metal? I think that hasn't yet been determined.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
What happened after the Iraqi government was destroyed? The missiles were destroyed and sold as scrap metal? I think that hasn't yet been determined.
If thats true, than the missles were there when SH was in power and therfore put him in violation.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
What happened after the Iraqi government was destroyed? The missiles were destroyed and sold as scrap metal? I think that hasn't yet been determined.
You are right, it hasn't been determined. According to UNMOVIC, UNMOVIC and the US inspection team aren't in communication. It is possible that missles were destroyed under US monitoring, but if so, no is talking (at least as far as I know). I'm also not sure in what condition the rocket engins were found.
"If thats true, than the missles were there when SH was in power and therfore put him in violation."
Nah, UNMOVIC were aware of the missles and were monitoring thier destructoin.
-
man...
ole Thrawn and Pongo are going to be at wits end come Bush's reelection...
Can anyone guess their whines?
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Iraq launched several missles at kuiwait during the invasion that were prohibited by the UN.
Which what type of missiles and do you have anymore information on times, places?
-
KUWAIT CITY/ BAGHDAD, March 29 2003 (Xinhuanet) -- The US-British forces launched a new round of attacks ...
Meanwhile, a short-range missile fired by Iraq struck the biggest shopping mall in Kuwait at around 1:45 a.m. local time (2245GMT Friday) and...
This was the 13th missile launched from Iraq toward Kuwait since the start of the war last week.
This one missile was said to be a Iraqi modified Silkworm and some reports say several of the other 13 were Al Samoud (Iraq modified Scuds)
That's what I found with a Google...
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
This one missile was said to be a Iraqi modified Silkworm and some reports say several of the other 13 were Al Samoud (Iraq modified Scuds)
That's what I found with a Google...
There reason I brought this up is because I had heard of the missile attacks, but I have never seen any verification that they were proscribed missiles. Heck I read one report that Kuwaitis thought that the missile you mentioned might have been an off-course US cruise missile, for what that's worth.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
SA-2 missiles were not prohibited, nor were their engines. The Al Samoud missile was not prohibited by the UN before February 2003 a mere month before the war, and they were destroyed under the supervision of UNMOVIC. The weapons launched against Kuwait in the first days of the war were FROG rockets and two CSS-C-3 Seersuckers (not "Silkworm") missiles. Iraqi forces used no prohibited weapons in the war.
Missiles with a range of more than 150km had been prohibited since '91. When the UN discovered these missiles they were then specifically prohibited. However, they were in violation since '91.
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/19208.pdf
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Why are we going over this again? Do you people really have such incredibly short attention spans?
What's the source of your quote? According to the UN it believed that the Al-Samoud was always capable of a range greater than 150km based on Iraqi flight testing.
From my source:
Al Samoud II (Photo at [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/25/iraq/main541855.shtml])
The Al Samoud II missile is a liquid propellant, vehicle mounted missile that has undergone extensive development and testing since the first Gulf War. The Al Samoud II is estimated to have a payload capacity of 300 kilograms 3 and intelligence sources
believe that up to 50 missiles may already be deployed to units.4 UN weapons inspectors suggested that Iraq’s Al Samoud IIs were in violation of the 93 mile (150 km) range restriction imposed by UNSCR 687 after reviewing Iraqi flight test data.
BTW, this mentions nothing about 1997 but rather indicates it was being tested since the first gulf war.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
First flight in 1997.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/missile/ababil.htm
First "declared" flight test.
"Around August 1991, Iraq started a secret project to construct a surface-to-surface missile called "J-1" without notifying the UN Special Commission [UNSCOM] as required by the Security Council resolutions."
But I'll conceded the date as it isn't so relavant to my argument that Iraq made every effort to thwart UN inspectors for 12 years.
-
How was your trip, Scholz?
Ravs
-
pleasure.
Ravs
-
Originally posted by GScholz
This must be the worst post you have ever posted AKIron. Calling SA-2 (a suface to air missile) engines for PROOF that Iraq had prohibited weapons is outright preposterous. What happened to you? You used to be reasonable, and argued with facts rather than just trying to justify your "side" in the debate.
If that's my worst post ever then I'm doing better than I thought. ;)
I'll just step back from this one for a while and see what develops.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Its interesting news, thats why it was posted.
You see, those of us that supported the action arent all that interested in "justifying" it to you. You dont count for much. :aok
No. Its trying to make a case for Iraqi WMD. thats why it was posted. And the poster was probably trying to convince himself. Not me.
And the truth or even reasonable probability of the truth dont count for much with some people.