Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Hortlund on March 10, 2003, 12:21:08 PM
-
I dunno...if this is true Blix should be quartered in the town square back home.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-605557,00.html
The British and US ambassadors plan to demand that Hans Blix reveals more details of a huge undeclared Iraqi unmanned aircraft, the discovery of which he failed to mention in his oral report to Security Council foreign ministers on Friday. Its existence was only disclosed in a declassified 173-page document circulated by the inspectors at the end of the meeting — an apparent attempt by Dr Blix to hide the revelation to avoid triggering a war.
-
Anyone know if this is real? I can't say I have alot of faith in British reports these days.
MiniD
-
Its in the 173 pages long UN report. Blix did not mention it during his oral report.
It's starting to hit the major news sites now. CNN has it up if you want to check it there.
-
Just saw it there (CNN) too.
Sigh... so much for objectivity.
MiniD
-
I also saw in that CNN article that Iraq was re-tooling missiles for chemical/biological use. This is awfully strange. I seem to remember a 12,000 page report that stated categorically that Iraq had no more banned weapons.
Maybe....just maybe...Iraq lied.:rolleyes:
-
Some bombs have now been found capable of delivering chemical/biological agents.... see fox news for info
-
Its existence was only disclosed in a declassified 173-page document circulated by the inspectors at the end of the meeting
Blix didn't hid it it's in the freakin' report. What's the matter these people don't know to read?..
What's he supposed to do read the entire report page per page? Besides UAVs are not considered WMD.
Nice try Hortland... sheeeh..
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Just saw it there (CNN) too.
Sigh... so much for objectivity.
MiniD
Heh. Surely you didn't expect Blix to be objective, did you? It was apparent from about day 2 that he had his own agenda, and it didn't coincide with the mandate he was charged with, which was to verify Iraq's supposed disarmament, not go on an Easter-egg hunt (no pun intended).
-
Ummmm... if they can excede 150km they are considered delivery vehicles 10bears.
You really should give up trying to excuse this one away and ask yourself why new development of this particular item would be left out of Blix's public report.
MiniD
-
Who else thinks that if we do invade and find illegal weapons, that france and other nations will call it a setup and say we "placed" the evidence?
-
Blix wants a 30 year contract to chase weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Ya can't get one of those unless there's going to be an Iraq.....so what ya spect him ta do eh?
Hey....keeps him feeling important and in the limelight :D
-
Originally posted by Hajo
Blix wants a 30 year contract to chase weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Ya can't get one of those unless there's going to be an Iraq.....so what ya spect him ta do eh?
Hey....keeps him feeling important and in the limelight :D
Does that make Hans Blix the Ken Starr of the UN?
-Sik
-
Well I saw it in the Daily Mirror, so it must be true - LOL.
No surprises really. My opinion of the UN since 1991 has not been flattering. The question that now needs to be asked is what else has Blix failed to report? Seems like we can't believe anyone. First Saddam says he has no WMD and then begins to destroy the very weapons he claimed he never had, and now we have the UN/Blix redrawing the lines on the playing field if not moving the goalposts around.
The only way to sort out this mess is for our guys to go in there and get him out of there.
Hmmph. Wonder what the peaceniks think of this. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by 10Bears
Blix didn't hid it it's in the freakin' report. What's the matter these people don't know to read?..
What's he supposed to do read the entire report page per page? Besides UAVs are not considered WMD.
Nice try Hortland... sheeeh..
You really should read that report. You can find it on the UN site. I'm in the process of doing that right now (Im on page 17).
Here is the link.
http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/
Here is a fun quote from Saddam I found in that report:
”I say that if Israel dares to hit even one piece of steel ona ny industrial site, we will make the fire eat half of Israel. (...) Let them hear, here and now, that we do possess binary chemical weapons which only the United States and Soviet Union have”.
Saddam Hussein 2 April 1990
That quote is the reason why there is a 150km range ban on all Iraqi delivery vehicles...be they rockets, UAVs or catapulted camels.
Now, here is the actual text from the report.
UNMOVIC has recieved intelligence reports of the development, during the past four years, of UAVs and RPVs that exceed the 150 kilomteres limit. In fact, one report describes a UAV with a range of 500 kilometers.
Iraq has not declared the develipment of any UAV. However it has declared that it developed during the past few years, two new RPV’s with a range of 100 kilometers. The stated design goal for one of the RPV’s, designated by Iraq as “RPV-20”, was to create a drone with an endurance of one hour that han an anutonomous system for guidance and control with GPS navigation. Recent inspections have also revealed the existance of a drone with a wingspan of 7.45 meters that has not been delcared by Iraq. Officials at the inspection site stated that the drone had been test flown.
Ok, so if that drone has a range beyond 150 (which it does) AND the Iraqis have been caught trying to hide it (which they have...that is what the "not been declared" part means)...what would that mean to you?
Because to me it means they have been caught. Period.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Anyone know if this is real? I can't say I have alot of faith in British reports these days.
MiniD
report just in from a NON-CNN reporter........
ONLY IN AMERICA
1. Only in America...... can a pizza get to
your house faster than an ambulance.
2. Only in America......are there handicap parking places in front of a skating rink.
3. Only in America.....do drugstores make the sick walk all the way to the back of the store to get their prescriptions while healthy people can buy cigarettes at the front.
4. Only in America......do people order double cheeseburgers, large fries, and a diet coke.
5. Only in America......do banks leave both doors open and then chain the pens to the counters.
6. Only in America......do we leave cars worth thousands of dollars in the driveway and put our useless junk in the garage.
7. Only in America......do we use answering machines to screen calls and then have call waiting so we won't miss a call from someone we didn't want to talk to in the first place.
8. Only in America......do we buy hot dogs in packages of ten and buns in packages of eight.
9. Only in America......do we use the word 'politics' to describe the process so well: 'Poli' in Latin meaning 'many' and 'tics' meaning 'bloodsucking creatures'.
10. Only in America......do they have drive-up ATM machines with Braille lettering.
EVER WONDER
Why the sun lightens our hair, but darkens our skin?
Why women can't put on mascara with their mouth closed?
Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?
Why is "abbreviated" such a long word?
Why is it that doctors call what they do "practice"?
Why is it that to stop Windows 98, you have to click on "Start"?
Why is lemon juice made with artificial flavor, and dishwashing liquid made with real lemons?
Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker?
Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour?
Why isn't there mouse-flavored cat food?
When dog food is new and improved tasting, who tests it?
Why didn't Noah swat those two mosquitoes?
Why do they sterilize the needle for lethal injections?
You know that indestructible black box that is used on airplanes? Why don't they make the whole plane out of that stuff?!
Why don't sheep shrink when it rains?
Why are they called apartments when they are all stuck together?
If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
If flying is so safe, why do they call the airport the terminal?
------------------
-
People with any common sense question anything FAUX News reports.
FAUX is about as credible a source as the National Enquirer.
Originally posted by Steve
Some bombs have now been found capable of delivering chemical/biological agents.... see fox news for info
-
Originally posted by weazel
People with any common sense question anything FAUX News reports.
FAUX is about as credible a source as the National Enquirer.
Read the UN report Weazel. It's right there. http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/
Click on cluster report.
Read
Enjoy
Prepare for war.
-
Maybe I'm missing something here, but should'nt Blix have pointed these particular items out?
Here's my report....here's what needs special attention.
I just don't get it. If your Bush, don't you point to this, go AHA!! and enforce 1441?
UN Pantywastes......
-
On that other type of cluster munitions missile:
In its 1996 FFCD, Iraq stated that, in May 1988, a project designated “Luna S” was initiated to convert the FROG rocket warhead into a cluster warhead constructed of aluminum and certain components from the Ababil 50 rocket. According to Iraq, Al Muthanna State Establishment rejuected the proposal to use an aluminum shell as a container for CW agents and the project was abandoned in July 1988. Iraq stated that only sketches had been produced and that no prototypes had been built.
Documents found at the Haidar Farm in 1995 were sent to a supporting Government for analysis in April 1996. In June 1997, the supporting Government provided a written assessment that the documentation contained all the necessary files and specifications to build a non-conventional warhead, probably a chemical warhead for the FROG rocket. The assessment also stated that some documents had been daten in March 1989 and in August 1990, which contradicted Iraq’s statement that all work relating to non-conventional warheads for such rockets had been abandoned in 1988.
ASSESSMENT
Iraq had the capability to develop indigenously and produce non-conventional warheads for weapons such as the Scud missile. It can, therefore, be assumed that Iraq also had the same capability for a short-range missile like the FROG. In addition, documentary evidence suggests that Iraq had worked on developing this capaility at least until August 1990.
-
Originally posted by weazel
People with any common sense question anything FAUX News reports.
FAUX is about as credible a source as the National Enquirer.
I get my news from multiple sources...where do you get yours from Weazel?
Hortlund, didn't you know? Anytime you give a good source or facts and data, that sends Weazel running.
-
The stated design goal for one of the RPV’s, designated by Iraq as “RPV-20”, was to create a drone with an endurance of one hour that han an anutonomous system for guidance and control with GPS navigation.
A super weapon using an American controlled homing device ?
it's a joke ?
-
Originally posted by Hajo
Blix wants a 30 year contract to chase weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Ya can't get one of those unless there's going to be an Iraq.....so what ya spect him ta do eh?
Hey....keeps him feeling important and in the limelight :D
EXACTLY!
you think he wants to report himself outa a job? outa the camera lens? back o ... what did he do before he become the un's doublespeak mouthpiece???
Plus the fact he doesn't have the big brass ones to be the one who pulls the trigger on a war with Iraq...
and the drones ............................. ... nothing to worry bout there..
SOLDIER'S CHILLING WARNING
An Iraqi defector has told Sky News that Saddam Hussein will use chemical weapons if the country is invaded.
His warning comes amid revelations Saddam Hussein may be planning to use pilotless drone planes to spray British and US troops with anthrax and sarin gas if they attack.
In an exclusive interview, the officer with Saddam's elite Republican Guard, said the use of chemical weapons by Iraq was "100% guaranteed".
The 26-year-old soldier defected 10 days ago near the city of Sulaymaniyah in Northern Iraq.
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-12265723,00.html
-
Originally posted by weazel
People with any common sense question anything FAUX News reports.
FAUX is about as credible a source as the National Enquirer.
It's on CNN too...just not on the front page. Weazel, with all due respect, bias is not equivalent to "untrue." If your standing far far on the left, than someone in the center still appears far far to your right. You can argue the opinion that Fox is biased differently from CNN (to use the two top cable shows as an example), as witnessed in this particular example: Fox is running the discoverly of these chemical/bio cluster bombs on their websites front page; at CNN you have to click an extra link (WORLD link) to get to it. News media bias comes in when a news organization chooses to emphasize certain news items while de-emphasizing others. The above is a classic example. That both these agencies are reporting the same information, the importance they give them is different.
I realize that any media outlet is likely to be biased to some extent...that's why I check more than one source. My suggestion is that you do the same before commenting as you've done above. Your knee-jerk reaction to the comment regarding the source mentioned (i.e. Fox), without bothering to check if the story was corroborated by other news outlets, casts doubt on your objectivity.
Regards,
Sabre
-
Straffo- I'm not extremely knowledgeable on GPS systems and satellites, but if I'm not mistaken the satellites are only American satellites. I don't believe it can be controlled as to what GPS devices can use the satellites, or in the same vein, be stopped from using those same satellites.
In other words- the technology is free for anyone to use around the world and short of turning off all the GPS satellites, there's no way to stop GPS systems from recieving world wide coordinates.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Straffo- I'm not extremely knowledgeable on GPS systems and satellites, but if I'm not mistaken the satellites are only American satellites. I don't believe it can be controlled as to what GPS devices can use the satellites, or in the same vein, be stopped from using those same satellites.
In other words- the technology is free for anyone to use around the world and short of turning off all the GPS satellites, there's no way to stop GPS systems from recieving world wide coordinates.
-SW
Essentially correct. The US can make the signal less accurate for "non-authorized" users. Former President Clinton ordered this feature turned off several years ago. It now takes an executive order from the President to re-enable this feature. Then, it is enabled world wide. Because of the extensive use by the transportation industry of the GPS signal, it is unlikely that this would happen; too many rely on it's high accuracy. Safety would become a real concern.
-
Well -sw I'm not an expert in GPS but I've worked on a positionning system for city buses some ... 8 year ago :)
And at this time the civilian were not having the same resolution ,the error (from memory) was randomly set between 200 and 600 meters/yard .
You can imagine that it was far from the precision we needed to manage the traffic in a town
I was not involved in the coding part for the GPS so I'm not sure how it work exactly.
I was just in the team making sure that no customer will be ever able to get a bus on time and at the right place :D
Our first demonstration were ... like my boss said :it's like looking at drunk ants :p
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
Does that make Hans Blix the Ken Starr of the UN?
-Sik
Blix found more and spent less.
:)
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Blix found more and spent less.
:)
ya think?
at what cost did his reports over the past 12 months come at?
do you think he'd be reading those reports if we didn't have 250,000 troops sitting over there? what did that cost? what does it cost everyday they are there? what he (blix) found is still in question what he spent is in the billions...
-
Originally posted by weazel
People with any common sense question anything FAUX News reports.
FAUX is about as credible a source as the National Enquirer.
Hey ah Weazel, wanna buy some tin foil hats?
-
Originally posted by 10Bears
Blix didn't hid it it's in the freakin' report. What's the matter these people don't know to read?..
What's he supposed to do read the entire report page per page? Besides UAVs are not considered WMD.
Nice try Hortland... sheeeh..
Since these weren't UAVs like the ones we have but rather planes modified to fly under remote control outfitted with equipment to disperse chemical/biological agents, I think that's pretty much a WMD. Even though it has no tactical use on a battlefield, any of these remote controlled planes has the range to reach most major capitals in the region.
ack-ack
-
Vulcan, it's aluminum foild, ,dammit. Do not mislead the gullible!!!
-
Then, it is enabled world wide. Because of the extensive use by the transportation industry of the GPS signal, it is unlikely that this would happen; too many rely on it's high accuracy. Safety would become a real concern.
Item 1: That is correct. Bear in mind that the old military GPS targeting accuracy available to the military was with nuclear weapons being considered... a lot of our hardened silos could withstand a near miss.. with GPS prcision gidance, there would be no such thing as a near miss.. hence the 600 yard offset variance for everything but a USAF GPS reciever. After the collapse of the soviet threat, the offset error mode was switched off.
With a UAV dispersing sarin or anthrax, the 600 yards don't mean toejam. the air-dispersed nature of these chemical materials rely a whole lot less on accuracy than does a nuke trying for a pinpoint hit on a silo door system.
Item 2: The UAV threat is about the worse news i've heard so far. Dispersing nerve agents with a missile or artilley shell can be a lot easier to foil than a UAV. The missile can be intercepted, the artillery site destroyed by counter battery radar controlled fire in moments.
The UAV on the other hand is flying below most military radars, and at too slow a speed to be picked up as a 'threat' by current military radar software algorythms. It is in fact as invisible to our tactical radars as is a stealth fighter to theirs. These things will go unnoticed by all our current detection systems including JStars.
The UAV's will be autonomus.. flying a pre-programed route, without any need for ground control contact. Truly one scary gawddamned threat.
The smaller UAV's the iraqi's have can easily payload 10 pounds with no problem at all over a range of 70 miles, travelling at 50mph with a simple off the shelf israli GPS directed autopilot in place of it's normal GCI gear. 10 lbs of anthrax dispersed over NYC would kill many thousands... and one could easily be launched from say the deck of a freighter 30 miles south of the ambrose light outside of New York harbor.
Fear the UAV's, gents.