NEWS: 380 Tons of Explosives Vanished From Site in Iraq - (UPDATE: TIMING QUESTIONED)

Originally posted by SIRR1
This stuff turned up missing 19 months ago, this is not current news!

Political spin by the major news networks to get people all worked up before the election over a bunker that was looted right after the invasion of Iraq.

Sure its bad that this stuff is gone, and in the hands of badguys. But this happened last May, not last weekend.

So, if this happened so long ago, why did the new Iraqi government just get around to telling anyone? If the U.S. knew about it, What did they do about it?

�Melissa Fleming, spokeswoman for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told CNN the interim Iraqi government reported several days ago that the explosives were missing from the Al Qaqaa complex, south of Baghdad.�

Originally posted by Phoenix
SIRRI, I think you got it right;

Fox News, April 4, 2003

. . .

Again this was saidMarch 2003

Old story with a new twist for political reasons - how far will the media go to elect Kerry - one has to wonder.

Phoenix, I wouldn�t go throwing any rocks at Kerry when you live in a greenhouse yourself.

Please note the headline to the story you link to above:

Allies Find Signs of Iraq's Chemical Preparedness

That story is clearly about chemical weapons, not about high explosives as is the case in today�s news. It is disingenuous of you to claim that these two stories are talking about the same thing.

This was the Iraqi government that announced this, not the media.

Originally posted by Phoenix


The Fox 2003 article tells of thousands of 2"x 5" box's containing three vials each of white powder they (UN or US) indicated might be an explosive.

So in other words, these boxes were there a year ago and they are gone now?

I don�t think that a 2inch by 3 inch box is what we are talking about here.

If these boxes contained a pound of explosive each (doubtful), then we are talking about 760,000 boxes.

I said it earlier and ill say it again. This was a know stock of explosives. From the CIA to the IAEA, they all knew it was there. What if the CIA or other org, decided it wanted a stockpile of exposives for thier own use?

Follow my fuzzy logic:

1) It was a huge target. Don't you think the USAF woul dhave hit it if they wanted too? I mean its a legit target and it directly impact the Iraqi's ability to fight etc.

2) As a previous poster pointed out, you need a few C-5's to get that stuff out. Would attract alot of attention unless it was sanctioned and done in a covert manner. I don't know if there is a railway near, its logical, those explosives had to get there at some point, but covert ops C-5's or 17's make more sence. Semi's would take forever

3) While I am impressed with the average Iraqi's ability to loot, the site is kind of isolated and how much high explosive would you take? I mean its not really applicable to your average Iraqi, unless you are planning a Jihad.


So maybe someone at the CIA decided this would be a cheap way to fund groups world wide, by selling and providing it to them ala Contras thats hard to trace and if they did, its easy to point ot the Black Market? What do you think?

Sorry it may have been old news but its played over and over in the news as it was todays story and they have not said that is was old news. Just that the looting started in March 2003.

Nobody knows if they were moved before the invasion or looted after the invasion and the white house is investigating in the matter because is a large quantity.

Of course the spin of this is that it somehow just happened under our military watch when in fact it happened well over a year ago. You are foolish to not recognized the revved up pro-Kerry spin coming out of the major media these last few days before the election. I wonder what happened to our major media outlets. They used to be in the information business, now they are in the indoctrination business. Scary that people still listen to them...

Could it had been the site of a massive battel that the US lost? This would not be something that you would want leaked out right away. Is this a possibility?

I mean, from what i have from friends and family friends in Iraq is that fighting is really bad for the soldiers and only getting worse. The independant state of Iraq may be rebuilding slowly so there is progress for democracy, but not for the stability of the nation as our country attempts to control it with our armed forces. This was not only Bush's decision, but our choice as a nation from our elected officials. Remember to vote or you can't bitch Nov 2nd.

Originally posted by HowardRoark

That is nice. Blame the Iraqis. Of course if they weren�t ready to take over the responsibility of running the country, then Why did you turn the keys over to them?

What a mess.

While yes I would tend to go with this , what about the fact these people
where exiles.. Would that not imply a political or activist type knowledge.
I think that and the fact they worked so hard to form and operate a mach
goverment during their wait. They should have been a little further along by now.

The explosives were moved from the warehouse prior to the land invasion by the US. The material is spread out throughout Iraq. If we had not already conducted extensive sweeps of the underground tunnel system I would say that a majority of it would be in the tunnel system. But they did not find any trace of it. I would assume that placing large caches of the explosive say under the radissen, in the green zone etc and detonating them under the building would cause quite a few casualties to the "infidles" once they took baghdad. But I do not think this is the case now. I assume that along with the cash and gold convoys to syria that a large portion of the trucking that went over the border to syria was HDX/RDX materials along with whatever remenats they might have had in regards to WMD developments. We already know that several key scientists buried centrifuge components on there own property to be dug up at a latter time. I suspect that there are other caches of WMD components still hidden in the Iraqi sand. Just like the Mig they found just out side of Baghdad Airport.

This report is nothing more than super spin cycle to attempt to give the Kerry Campaign some semblance of traction. No where in the article does it say when the material disapeared just that the IAEA is now reporting it. Also I thought Saddam didn't have any capabilities to make nukes but the report says the missing material can be used to make nukes? Fishy, Fishy?

For further proof of the spin machine here is John Kerry's camp take on the story.

In Washington, presidential hopeful John Kerry's campaign said the Bush administration "must answer for what may be the most grave and catastrophic mistake in a tragic series of blunders" in Iraq.

"How did they fail to secure nearly 380 tons of known, deadly explosives despite clear warnings from the IAEA to do so?" senior Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart asked in a statement. "These explosives can be used to blow up airplanes, level buildings, attack our troops and detonate nuclear weapons. The Bush administration knew where this stockpile was, but took no action to secure the site."

The military couldn't secure it they weren't there yet. Desparation from the Kerry Camp, thats all.

There's no ineptitude here
It's all planned for future occurrences
Probably when the true blue-blood gets elected
Tho' thats hanging in the balance
Strange times!

Was it not there when the troops moved in?

U.N. weapons inspectors went repeatedly to the vast al Qa Qaa complex -- most recently on March 8 -- but found nothing during spot visits to some of the 1,100 buildings at the site 25 miles south of Baghdad.

Or was it?

Col. John Peabody, engineer brigade commander of the 3rd Infantry Division, said troops found thousands of 2-by-5-inch boxes, each containing three vials of white powder, together with documents written in Arabic that dealt with how to engage in chemical warfare. Initial reports suggest the powder is an explosive, but tests are still being done,

From the 2003 FOX article, they report you choose.

Originally posted by SIRR1
This stuff turned up missing 19 months ago, this is not current news!

Then why didn't they guard it? They were looting as recently as sunday! :wtf:
Talk about spin!

The huge facility, called Al Qaqaa, was supposed to be under American military control but is now a no man's land, still picked over by looters as recently as Sunday.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by curme]

It is gone due to lacks of security or Bush jumped on the Regan band waggon and sold them to someone that we are going to have trouble with later.

Originally posted by curme
Then why didn't they guard it? They were looting as recently as sunday! :wtf:
Talk about spin!

They didn't guard it because they didn't even make it to Bagdhad until after it was gone. 19 months ago would be March 2003 and US troops didn't make it to Bagdhad until April 9th.



news.bbc.co.uk...

OK, please explain this to me.

How is this some sort of pro-Kerry spin/story when the material was reported missing to the IAEA by the Iraqi interim government, a group that would ostensibly be pro Bush. Why did the White house order the CIA to investigate if this is nothing more than an anti Bush stunt?

Originally posted by BlackJackal

They didn't guard it because they didn't even make it to Bagdhad until after it was gone. 19 months ago would be March 2003 and US troops didn't make it to Bagdhad until April 9th.

The letter from the Iraqi ministry of Science and Technology says it went missing after April 9 2003.

We would like to inform you that the following materials which have been included in Annex 3 (item 74) registered under the IAEA custody were lost after 9/4/2003, throughout the theft and looting of the governmental installations due to lack of security. Therefore we feel an urgent updating of the registered materials is required.

They were lost during the looting that took place while the US was still attempting to get control of Bagdhad! It says it right there in the memo you reference!

Originally posted by BlackJackal
They were lost during the looting that took place while the US was still attempting to get control of Bagdhad! It says it right there in the memo you reference!

They should have made the security of that site and other weapons sites a priority instead of allowing looters to take those explosives!

Instead, they allowed looting at many sites that were previously under the IAEA watch. That's a stupid thing to do in this war over WMDs.

Originally posted by rg73

Nice math. The problem is how are they going to move 380 tons of something all at once? I'm pretty sure this far exceeds the weight a semi can tow. I think that a cargo car on a train might be able to hold somewhere in the vicinity of 100 tons. A B-52 can only carry 250 tons. So they'd have to load that all onto a fleet of semi's and then that is going to attract a lot of attention before they even get close to a target. That, or load it onto several rail cars and detonate when the train goes through their target. That, of course, would be putting all your explosive eggs in one basket and it would just be dumb.

Umm, The B-52's maximum takeoff weight is around 250 tons but there is no way it can carry that much, think about it. The maximum the BUFF has carried is about 55 000lb during the Vietnam War.

When they can blow a plane up with a pound of the stuff, why go for one big hit? The property, life and psychological damage of thousands of attacks will be greater than blowing their wad all at once (if it were even possible to transport it all in one vehicle). I mean at one plane per pound, they could, theoretically, bomb 760,000 planes right?

A pound of any HE will takeout a plane there is nothing magical about these explosives.

It would be impossible to get a high order detonation if the entire 380t were detonated all at once. Look at how thick the walls are on US bombs, this is to contain the explosion and conflagarate all the HE inside before the casing bursts.

If you think these explosives are powerful have a look at CL-20 and AFX-757

So, were these weapons removed before or after the US showed up?

(hey, does anyone remember those missing Iraqi tankers they were tracking before the war that were out at sea??)