It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

To all that though there were no WMD's in Iraq

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Then what to you call this?

Iraq's interim government confirmed Thursday the United States has removed radioactive material from Iraq, saying ousted dictator Saddam Hussein could have used it to develop nuclear weapons.

U.S. and U.N. officials said Wednesday Washington had transported 1.8 tons of enriched uranium out of Iraq for safekeeping more than a year after looters stole it from a U.N.-sealed facility left unguarded by U.S. troops.


This was taken from here

1.8 tons of enriched uranium! That seems like a lot to me. It really can only be used for one thing: making a bomb. Pretty damn funny that US troops left it unguarded though. Nevertheless, it was there and it was stolen.

Let's here what all of the anti-war people are going to say about this now.




posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Actually their is ongoing speculation as to wether this was actually "Iraq's" or a stockpile that has been completely cleared out of Ramstein AFB in Germany.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also the UN had no prior knowledge to the transporting of these materials..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm not Ati-War, just in search of the truth to this matter.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:32 AM
link   
you may find the truth more interesting...
www.democraticunderground.com...



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickmastertricK
I'm not Ati-War, just in search of the truth to this matter.


I agree, I support the was as well, but lets call it what it was. Securing oil our country needs. The lightly enrinched uranium should not shock anybody. The Iraq's had the equipment for years. We or the Germans, french, english sold it to them. North Korea is activly making Highly enriched uranium and is publicly going about making a bomb. Why don't we go in? No oil. That being said, I would like to find something.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I think you are missing the point. They STOLE the enriched uranium to make a freaking bomb. Calling it slightly enriched doesn't keep it from being weapons grade uranium does it? It was stolen for one purpose: To make a weapon of mass destruction.

I



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Hmm.. enriched Uranium. Almost noone stops to wonder if perhaps it could've been used for fueling a power plant? Now, that 'could' open up some possibilities of 'really' horrific damage.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
you may find the truth more interesting...
www.democraticunderground.com...



What truth? This was citing something entirely different. This was taken from your source:

But sadly, and inevitably, that damned thing called "truth" had to come rear its ugly head and spoil the party. The deadly chemical weapons weren't deadly after all, and what little trace of chemicals that was left in them had outlived its shelf-life by about 15 years.... oops. The U.S. Central Command itself rebutted these claims from the Polish military.

So enriched uranium has a 20 year "shelf-life"? Didn't think so. That article may be true, but what I was talking about is something entirely different. Got it?


OBTW, I am not going to take something as truth that comes from the totally biased site The Democratic Underground



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:44 AM
link   
what they are finding there are old spent shell casings that are testing positive for radiation. that would be interesting, if it wasnt for the fact they left out the part where the shells are dismantled into useless scrap and have been tagged by the UN in 91. it is something we call scrap metal. OPEN THY EYES!!



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
you may find the truth more interesting...
www.democraticunderground.com...



Again this comes from Anti-Bush sites,
Look if anyone has seen my posts before you know I hate Bush and think he is an idiot. The thing I am concerned about is people taking these things at face value, without looking into them. Once the information is researched on your own, it will lead you to even greater things. I think we all know their is high doubt about finding WMD's as to GW's huge proclamtion for going to war. We all know that they had chemical weapons, these trace things have been found. The way GW made it seem to me as a precursor for war is that Saddam had HUGE stockpiles of Nucleur weapons, well where are they? Who Knows?

FredT,

I think we should have gone into Iran, or North Korea first. They were the ones basically saying, hey, look over her, we are persuing a nucleur weapon, yoo-hoo over here. Saddam, in my opinion, was not as big a threat to the world as GW made him out to be. He did not threaten the US or anyone else in the last 10 yrs. Meanwhile NK is building nucleur weapons rather than feeding their people.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crysstaafur
Hmm.. enriched Uranium. Almost noone stops to wonder if perhaps it could've been used for fueling a power plant? Now, that 'could' open up some possibilities of 'really' horrific damage.


As someone else pointed out, it was lightly enriched. Can't be used for fueling a power plant. Two words: dirty bomb.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
what they are finding there are old spent shell casings that are testing positive for radiation. that would be interesting, if it wasnt for the fact they left out the part where the shells are dismantled into useless scrap and have been tagged by the UN in 91. it is something we call scrap metal. OPEN THY EYES!!


Umm NO.

Along with 1.77 tons of enriched uranium, about 1,000 "highly radioactive sources" were also removed.

The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility on 23 June, after being packaged by 20 experts from the US Energy Department's secret laboratories.

It was flown out of the country aboard a military plane in a joint operation with the Department of Defense, and is being stored temporarily at a Department of Energy facility.

Taken from BBC

Their are no reports to shell casings, casings were found about two months ago with trace elements in it, but this is something totally different.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Whether it's true or not, many of us were against the war for more than the lack of evidence for WMDs - considering that this was just released on Yahoo about an hour ago, when we've been at war over this for over a year, makes this recent discovery just as circumstantial as the period of time at the start of the war when no WMDs could be found...and why would Iraq's interim gov't release this info within the same time frame as the US officials pulling out?

I'm not suggesting any kind of conspiracy here, but just bringing it up for debate and for my own enlightenment perhaps...



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by nyarlathotep
I think you are missing the point. They STOLE the enriched uranium to make a freaking bomb. Calling it slightly enriched doesn't keep it from being weapons grade uranium does it? It was stolen for one purpose: To make a weapon of mass destruction.

I


where was it stolen from?



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
what they are finding there are old spent shell casings that are testing positive for radiation. that would be interesting, if it wasnt for the fact they left out the part where the shells are dismantled into useless scrap and have been tagged by the UN in 91. it is something we call scrap metal. OPEN THY EYES!!


Huh? How did you come to that conclusion? Did you read the article I linked? It didn't say anything about spent shell casings testing positive for radiation. It said 1.8 tons of lightly enriched uranium. The sheel casings your are referring to have depleted uranium. Big difference. Perhaps it is you that should open your eyes.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickmastertricK
where was it stolen from?


Did anyone read the freaking article? Here:

U.S. officials said lightly enriched uranium, which could be used in such a bomb, was airlifted to an undisclosed U.S. site after its removal from the Tuwaitha nuclear complex south of Baghdad, a one-time center of Iraq's nuclear weapons programs.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   
This enriched uranium isn't anything new. It isn't anything we didn't know about since well before Gulf War 1.

This material was under UN supervision and monitoring. It wasn't being hidden by Saddam by any stretch of the imagination.

It was only after we invaded, and then failed to secure this facility which we knew all about, that looters stole the stuff. So as justification for invasion, this seems like a piss-poor excuse to me.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun
..and why would Iraq's interim gov't release this info within the same time frame as the US officials pulling out?


It was moved out before the Iraqi government took control. I believe they are just issuing a statement to the fact of it happening, there were many reports of this out before this one was released. If it was known when they were doing it, it would make for one huge target.

The thing we need to find out is whether this is "Iraq's" or The "US's"
If anyone knows anybody at Ramstein AFB in Germany please u2u me or any other ATSNN staff.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by x_y_no
This enriched uranium isn't anything new. It isn't anything we didn't know about since well before Gulf War 1.

This material was under UN supervision and monitoring. It wasn't being hidden by Saddam by any stretch of the imagination.

It was only after we invaded, and then failed to secure this facility which we knew all about, that looters stole the stuff. So as justification for invasion, this seems like a piss-poor excuse to me.


You are correct, I was wrong. Not a very good excuse, I will admit that. As Roseanne, Roseanna Danna used to say: NEVERMIND!


[edit on 7-8-2004 by nyarlathotep]



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by nyarlathotep


Did anyone read the freaking article? Here:

U.S. officials said lightly enriched uranium, which could be used in such a bomb, was airlifted to an undisclosed U.S. site after its removal from the Tuwaitha nuclear complex south of Baghdad, a one-time center of Iraq's nuclear weapons programs.


Calm down here, it does not mention it was "Stolen" and who would have stolen it?

If anyone would check the links I provided above, The US moved this material from Iraq to, only speculation right now -->, the Y-12 site in Tennesse. We have conflicting reports as to where this material "Actually" came from.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyarlathotep

Originally posted by Crysstaafur
Hmm.. enriched Uranium. Almost noone stops to wonder if perhaps it could've been used for fueling a power plant? Now, that 'could' open up some possibilities of 'really' horrific damage.


As someone else pointed out, it was lightly enriched. Can't be used for fueling a power plant. Two words: dirty bomb.


That kinda goes against your initial statement. A dirty bomb is no where near as damaging as Thermonuclear Bomb/Missle. Yes, I will admit that the fallout from a dirty bomb is indeed nasty for it's range and it's portability is an issue.

It could be used for fueling a power plant. Think about it, where does the U.S. get it's uranium supply? Do we just chunk in raw ore? Do we try to make the ore as pure as possible? I would say somewhere in the middle of those two extremes actually. Additionally there are also recycling facilities in other nuclear powered countries that can re-use the uranium. Even slightly enriched
uranium could be used as a fuel, then it's waste product could be made into an even more destructive weapon. Perhaps it wasn't in Saddam's budget, who knows? Just last year people were starting to wonder when N. Korea began switching on it's nuclear power plants, now what are they up to??




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join