Minnesota news station has footage of missing 380 tons explotives existed in Iraq after US invaded...

[Todd33]

It looks like if all of the explosives were not there, a sh!t load was and left unprotected. If we had the number of troops needed to not just get to Baghdad, but also lock it down and prevent looting, we would not be having these conversations. Blame Rummy and his war on the cheap.

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: adlep

All Neocons on the board and Bush == owned...

We're as a group quite a bit older than the OT crowd & really don't like the "owned" stuff. Please stop.

let the kid have his fun, at least he can go tell his little classmates he got to be in a real political discussion with grown-ups.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: adlep

All Neocons on the board and Bush == owned...

We're as a group quite a bit older than the OT crowd & really don't like the "owned" stuff. Please stop.

let the kid have his fun, at least he can go tell his little classmates he got to be in a real political discussion with grown-ups.

Yeah, Pliablemoose. Don't take him so seriously. He probably talks to God.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

ha, grown-ups on P&N? What forum have you been visiting?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Todd33
It looks like if all of the explosives were not there, a sh!t load was and left unprotected. If we had the number of troops needed to not just get to Baghdad, but also lock it down and prevent looting, we would not be having these conversations. Blame Rummy and his war on the cheap.

From another thread today you stated:

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...ar+AND+rummy+AND+cheap

WTF are you railing about? They scrapped the Clinton plans, it called for 500,000 troops. I suggest you read Woodward, or anything instead of making crap up. Rummy worked for months on making the new Iraq invasion cheap, fast and low numbers. It worked for attacking a traditional force (a weak one like Iraqs), but it failed to secure the country. Are you forgetting the reality in Iraq? People warned of this outcome, Powell sent two specialist to Rummy and he threw them out, he didn't like their opinions, which turned out true.

Now aren't you the same guy that complained about me repeating my comedic line about the Abilene Kinkos a few times recently within the span of a whole month? Yes, I believe that was you (with some assistance from a sidekick). Seems you have no room to talk about spouting the same line over again. And waddayer know, you even did it within the very same day.

Hope all the stones are cleared from you glass house now.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Now aren't you the same guy that complained about me repeating my comedic line about the Abilene Kinkos a few times recently within the span of a whole month? Yes, I believe that was you (with some assistance from a sidekick). Seems you have no room to talk about spouting the same line over again. And waddayer know, you even did it within the very same day.

Hope all the stones are cleared from you glass house now.

This is without a doubt the stupidest "expose" in the history of this board. Neither of these statements is a joke, and they reflect (in slightly different ways) a consistent opinion on an important subject. You aren't exactly Woodward and Bernstein - more like Stephen Glass.

 

[CaptnKirk]

We're as a group quite a bit older than the OT crowd & really don't like the "owned" stuff

Our preference is 'Leased, with Dividends'

You may respond accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1.1D material is the mass detonating 'Bomb' minus the fuse.

That dosen't tell the entire story though, some of the 1.1D type material
is used as a propellant for a rocket engine, anywhere from the RPG motor
up to some missles the Iraqi's made on the site.

Ammonium Nitrate is a part of HMX & RDX chemical makeup

Ammonium Nitrate is also a Class 1.1D explosive - Think Tim McVeigh

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-118.html">They told us that our life expectancy was less than three seconds -
if there was a malfunction during the assembly of the of the system</a>
We had to park our cars 1//2 mile away and walk in each morning.
No motor vehicles &amp; no static electricity - religiously.

Bad stuff

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Now aren't you the same guy that complained about me repeating my comedic line about the Abilene Kinkos a few times recently within the span of a whole month? Yes, I believe that was you (with some assistance from a sidekick). Seems you have no room to talk about spouting the same line over again. And waddayer know, you even did it within the very same day.

Hope all the stones are cleared from you glass house now.

This is without a doubt the stupidest "expose" in the history of this board. Neither of these statements is a joke, and they reflect (in slightly different ways) a consistent opinion on an important subject. You aren't exactly Woodward and Bernstein - more like Stephen Glass.

And the sidekick chimes in. The judge has spoken.

Steven Glass/glass house. Is there some connection there or was it a Freudian thing?

 

[Crimson]

I'm really confused here.. this stuff is extremely dangerous and HAD to be secured or the fate of the whole free world is at stake.. but Iraq had no WMD's... well.. which is it? Any if this stuff was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dangerous why didn't the U.N. destroy it? Why did they allow Hussein to keep it? Besides, I think 400,000 tons would be WAY more than whats there.. that doesn't look like much to me.

Why isn't anyone blaming the U.N. for not destroying this stuff? Putting some seals on it guarantees Hussein wouldn't use it?

You guys flip-flop more than Kerry.

 

[wjgollatz]

"At one point there was a group of Iraqis driving around in a pick-up truck,"Staley said. "Three or four guys we kept an eye on, worried they might come near us."

So - that's it? 3 guys in a Toyota pick-up truck - moved three hundred seventy seven tons of high explosives in their little old truck? While not dodging the relentless convoys of military trucks, tanks, and troop, three guys in a pickup truck were the culprits?


ha ha ha ha

 

[drewshin]

Originally posted by: wjgollatz

"At one point there was a group of Iraqis driving around in a pick-up truck,"Staley said. "Three or four guys we kept an eye on, worried they might come near us."

So - that's it? 3 guys in a Toyota pick-up truck - moved three hundred seventy seven tons of high explosives in their little old truck? While not dodging the relentless convoys of military trucks, tanks, and troop, three guys in a pickup truck were the culprits?


ha ha ha ha

ha ha you're right, they probably just took what they could, a couple of hundred pounds which is enough to kill off a couple hundred of our soldiers. maybe because no one was stopping them, they decided to come back several times that same day to get more, and even called all of their friends over to get some. you're so funny.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Crimson
I'm really confused here.. this stuff is extremely dangerous and HAD to be secured or the fate of the whole free world is at stake.. but Iraq had no WMD's... well.. which is it? Any if this stuff was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dangerous why didn't the U.N. destroy it? Why did they allow Hussein to keep it? Besides, I think 400,000 tons would be WAY more than whats there.. that doesn't look like much to me.

Why isn't anyone blaming the U.N. for not destroying this stuff? Putting some seals on it guarantees Hussein wouldn't use it?

You guys flip-flop more than Kerry.

Huh? WMD's belong to a specific category. These are conventional, albeit powerful explosives. The concern isn't that Saddam had them. Just about every country with a military has an equivalent, however it's now gone. It is possible that we left an opening for the terrorists to grab it and cause a considerable amount of mischief.

It isn't about Saddam, it's about terrorists. Don't confuse them again please.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Crimson
I'm really confused here.. this stuff is extremely dangerous and HAD to be secured or the fate of the whole free world is at stake.. but Iraq had no WMD's... well.. which is it? Any if this stuff was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dangerous why didn't the U.N. destroy it? Why did they allow Hussein to keep it? Besides, I think 400,000 tons would be WAY more than whats there.. that doesn't look like much to me.

Why isn't anyone blaming the U.N. for not destroying this stuff? Putting some seals on it guarantees Hussein wouldn't use it?

You guys flip-flop more than Kerry.

I gather you're speaking out of willful ignorance, rather than unintentional ignorance - I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

These were high explosives, not WMDs. Under the terms of the UN treaty with Iraq, of which GHWB approved, Iraq was allowed to retain non-WMD weapons to protect itself against its neighbors (one of whom is, you know, a member of the "axis of evil").

Those pictures show a very small area, in a compound that consists of more than 1,100 buildings. Has it ever occurred to you that those pictures don't show the insides of 1,100 buildings?

 

[Engineer]

Rumsfield hasn't seen the video?

 

[drewshin]

Originally posted by: Crimson
I'm really confused here.. this stuff is extremely dangerous and HAD to be secured or the fate of the whole free world is at stake.. but Iraq had no WMD's... well.. which is it? Any if this stuff was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dangerous why didn't the U.N. destroy it? Why did they allow Hussein to keep it? Besides, I think 400,000 tons would be WAY more than whats there.. that doesn't look like much to me.

Why isn't anyone blaming the U.N. for not destroying this stuff? Putting some seals on it guarantees Hussein wouldn't use it?

You guys flip-flop more than Kerry.

exactly. why didn't the u.n. destroy all the guns and grenades in iraq before our troops got there? can you explain that to me? they should have at least cut off all the hands of those folks in the iraqi army...we knew those hands would be up to no good. :laugh:

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: Crimson
I'm really confused here.. this stuff is extremely dangerous and HAD to be secured or the fate of the whole free world is at stake.. but Iraq had no WMD's... well.. which is it? Any if this stuff was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dangerous why didn't the U.N. destroy it? Why did they allow Hussein to keep it? Besides, I think 400,000 tons would be WAY more than whats there.. that doesn't look like much to me.

Why isn't anyone blaming the U.N. for not destroying this stuff? Putting some seals on it guarantees Hussein wouldn't use it?

You guys flip-flop more than Kerry.

Huh? WMD's belong to a specific category. These are conventional, albeit powerful explosives. The concern isn't that Saddam had them. Just about every country with a military has an equivalent, however it's now gone. It is possible that we left an opening for the terrorists to grab it and cause a considerable amount of mischief.

It isn't about Saddam, it's about terrorists. Don't confuse them again please.

Then why not criticize the U.N. for not disposing of it when they had the chance? Obviously THEY did not consider it important enough to do anything put put a couple stickers on the door. Why is it GWB's fault this stuff disapeared when the U.N. had the opportunity to destroy it and chose not to?

 

[adlep]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: Crimson
I'm really confused here.. this stuff is extremely dangerous and HAD to be secured or the fate of the whole free world is at stake.. but Iraq had no WMD's... well.. which is it? Any if this stuff was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO dangerous why didn't the U.N. destroy it? Why did they allow Hussein to keep it? Besides, I think 400,000 tons would be WAY more than whats there.. that doesn't look like much to me.

Why isn't anyone blaming the U.N. for not destroying this stuff? Putting some seals on it guarantees Hussein wouldn't use it?

You guys flip-flop more than Kerry.

Huh? WMD's belong to a specific category. These are conventional, albeit powerful explosives. The concern isn't that Saddam had them. Just about every country with a military has an equivalent, however it's now gone. It is possible that we left an opening for the terrorists to grab it and cause a considerable amount of mischief.

It isn't about Saddam, it's about terrorists. Don't confuse them again please.

Then why not criticize the U.N. for not disposing of it when they had the chance? Obviously THEY did not consider it important enough to do anything put put a couple stickers on the door. Why is it GWB's fault this stuff disapeared when the U.N. had the opportunity to destroy it and chose not to?

Dude, you go and take your deviations off this topic elsewhere.
The video exists and it clearly does a lot of damage to the Chimp's administration.
The story surfaced. NeoCons tried to backpedal out of it (the Russians story, the Before the invasion story)
and now, the video is the purest ownage to the Chimp and his incompetence yet...
You go, watch that video and tell me what you think...
Edit: They did put the IAEA seals all over the complex. The seals are being broken BY THE US SOLDIERS.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Then why not criticize the U.N. for not disposing of it when they had the chance? Obviously THEY did not consider it important enough to do anything put put a couple stickers on the door. Why is it GWB's fault this stuff disapeared when the U.N. had the opportunity to destroy it and chose not to?

Since when is it the UN's job to dispose of massive amounts of non-WMD excess ordnance? That is an exceedingly dangerous task, and one they are neither equipped or trained for. We're talking about hundreds of thousands of pounds of exceptionally high-powered explosive material.

Besides, if we'd protected it, we could have used it for any number of civil-engineering applications ourselves.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Then why not criticize the U.N. for not disposing of it when they had the chance? Obviously THEY did not consider it important enough to do anything put put a couple stickers on the door. Why is it GWB's fault this stuff disapeared when the U.N. had the opportunity to destroy it and chose not to?


Can you grasp the difference between weapons under the supervision of a trained workforce
that is working on a Military Installation making weapons for an Army -

and a bunch of random civilians running around willy-nilly with whatever they had looted
from a Weapons Depot ?

Can you come to terms with what that was there was allowed by our cease-fire agrement
at the end of Gulf-1, and the UN didn't need to destroy permisible products ?

The UN Inspectors had been finding disallowed products, and destroying those that were not
in compliance, and were sealing and tagging those which may have a 'Dual-Purpose' for
re-evaluation at a later date, if - and only if, they were of a questionable use.

Do you think that we would trust you to walk into the Rock Island Arsenal and take whatever you
wanted, and drive away in a Toyota Truck, because we were too shortsighted to lock it down ?

The weapons were of a known use and location - until Hussein was toppled, therefore non-threatening.

Now that everyone in Iraq has a hundred pounds or so, the threat level rises above 'Beige'.

 

[Jhhnn]

It wasn't in the UN mandate to order such explosives destroyed, Crimson, plain and simple. Had Iraqis shown the UN inspectors that such would have been used for some purpose other than nukes, they would have been allowed to do so. Unlike some, the UN was playing by the rules.

The whole affair illustrates at least two important points. First off, the Admin set off on this adventure undermanned and underplanned, and have done their dead level best to obfuscate that fact. The guys of the 101 would have had a grand old time blowing those storage facilities sky high, if that had been their orders... or would have secured the facility, if that had been their orders.

The crowning glory to it all is the claim that the Russians took 'em, to Syria... Yeh, that's it... If you're gonna tell a lie, tell a whopper, something so transparently lame that they'll figure you couldn't possibly have just made it up to cover your ass... you couldn't be that stupid...

 

[adlep]

Lets keep it on topic please, the video, we have to comment the video...
(The Russians did it)

 

[villager]

Originally posted by: adlep
Lets keep it on topic please, the video, we have to comment the video...
(The Russians did it)

David Kay was on CNN said that video was the proof. Now how will the Bushies spin this.

 

[BBond]

David Kay was all over the Bush adminsitration tonight. He said if a U.S. soldier breaks a UN seal on an arms bunker the U.S. OWNED THAT BUNKER. The bunkers with the seals did indeed contain HMX and RDX. These were the only arms sealed by the UN at AlQaqaa. Kay specifically identified the seal as well as the explosives in the bunker CONCLUSIVELY. He described the drums contained a plastic bag with the explosives which are in a powdered form. He said point blank that the reason for the looting of these explosives was that the Bush administration didn't send in enough troops to secure the country after he invaded.

On the question of WMD, Aaron Brown asked him point blank if the expolsives were WMD and Kay answered immediately, NO. He explained these explosives can be formed into a 'lens' to trigger a nuclear device.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Crimson
Then why not criticize the U.N. for not disposing of it when they had the chance? Obviously THEY did not consider it important enough to do anything put put a couple stickers on the door. Why is it GWB's fault this stuff disapeared when the U.N. had the opportunity to destroy it and chose not to?

LOL, another Bush apologist trying to pass the blame onto someone else. I wouldn't be suprised if the neocons somehow tried to blame Kerry for this.

 

[TranceNation]

haha it's the UN's fault now? LOL
xmas is coming, might as well blame santa clause