WAR: Professional Arms Looting in Iraq

Organized professional looters systematically dismantled Iraqi weapons installations and hauled the goodies away by truck after Baghdad fell in April 2003. A US news report covered one instance of this looting - but approximately 90 key sites in Iraq were looted or razed after the US-led invasion, according to UN reports. Critics say this kind of targeted looting has to be seen as a proliferation threat. White House officials had no comment except to say 'it was already well known that many weapons sites had been looted.' The only national buyers accessible by truck are Syria, Iran and US-ally Saudi Arabia.





Equipment for making parts for missiles, and chemical, biological and nuclear arms are missing from Iraq's abandoned unconventional weapons program. That program was the stated reason for the US-led invasion, but occupation forces did not find any unconventional arms. CIA inspectors concluded that the effort had been dormant since the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

Two international agencies are responsible for monitoring weapons proliferation activities, but have been barred from Iraq since the US-led invasion - the Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (Unmovic). Using satellites to monitor the situation, both agencies have been sending regular reports to the UN Security Council for nearly a year, detailing evidence and in a few cases, the movement of trucks containing Iraqi materials to other countries.

Unmovic asked Iraq's neighbors if any shipments had moved into or through their countries. Syria says no, but Iran and Saudi Arabia have yet to respond.

Most likely, the equipment is on the black market or already in the hands of foreign governments. The irony is that the USA justified the war on Iraq by saying it was necessary to prevent this exact situation.

Originally posted by soficrow

Unmovic asked Iraq's neighbors if any shipments had moved into or through their countries. Syria says no, but Iran and Saudi Arabia have yet to respond.

Lol, what were they expecting....

"Oh right, you mean those weapons, i thought it was a banana."

Originally posted by rapier28

"Oh right, you mean those weapons, i thought it was a banana."

Ya gotta wonder tho...

Our boys are so alert and keyed up that they're accidentally shooting Italian journalists and agents and Bulgarian allies.

But somehow, huge truck convoys with humongous cranes and other stuff on them can drive through the entire country unmolested and cross the borders...

Did they have papers? Stop at all the checkpoints? How did they get through? ...In an occupied country with otherwise trigger-happy US soldiers guarding Iraq's democracy and security...


.

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by rapier28

"Oh right, you mean those weapons, i thought it was a banana."

Ya gotta wonder tho...

Our boys are so alert and keyed up that they're accidentally shooting Italian journalists and agents and Bulgarian allies.

But somehow, huge truck convoys with humongous cranes and other stuff on them can drive through the entire country unmolested and cross the borders...

Did they have papers? Stop at all the checkpoints? How did they get through? ...In an occupied country with otherwise trigger-happy US soldiers guarding Iraq's democracy and security...


.

You 'assume" the US had complete control of the entire country during the drive to bagdad. hey, look at a map, errr, Iraq is a pretty large country. If you go back, much of the "looting" took place when the US was getting "hosed" by the UN "keeping Saddam Secure councile" was stalling.

During "battle" an especially at the end of a campain there is mcuh 'anarchy"........

Rent the Clint Eastwood movie "kelly's Hero's" it is actually based on fact.

Unbelievable......I love stuff like this, not for the implications it has for 'terrorist activity', but for how juvenile it makes our government look.

In the weeks after Baghdad fell in April 2003

It happened under our military's noses?!? Let me get this straight......we put how much money(derived from taxes) into a military so that they can defend our country with brains and brawn that is hopefully the premier in the world.........this military may be many things, but it isn't stupid.


Weapons depots are strategic points. I believe that we knew so much about Iraqi installations that we were broadcasting the locations on a map over the airwaves for the public!!! Furthermore, the first thing you do in a war is take possession of their communications and resources, weapons being high on that list. And our military left the place alone?!?!? There wasn't anyone there?!?!? You mean any one with half a brain(admittedly more than that for a sophisticated 'loot' such as this) could just walk up and claim possession. And they got away without any contestation from other countries?!?!

Neighboring countries: There's a war going on close by and here comes what looks like a military convoy.....

Lead truck: We're on vacation and thought we'd just pass on through....

Neighboring countries: Vacation in the middle of war?.......I don't know....what's you got in the truck?

Lead truck: Old gameboys and bamboo welcome mats........we own several swap meets in the surrounding areas......

Neighboring countries: In that case!!! *cshk* Yeah, these guys are good to go, over.*cshk*......

*cshk* That's a good copy *cshk*

I can't believe this at all........something smells funny........our military doesn't just overlook something like that.........

Originally posted by DrHoracid If you go back, much of the "looting" took place when the US was getting "hosed" by the UN "keeping Saddam Secure councile" was stalling.

That's actually not true.
Most of the loting took place after the war.
The UN had been monitoring those sites just before the war began, as I stated in the thread below:
WAR: U.N. agency: 90 dangerous sites looted in Iraq

UNMOVIC 28 February 2005

UNMOVIC imagery analysts have continued the ongoing review of the status of sites subject to inspection and monitoring in Iraq. Of the 411 sites inspected in the period from November 2002 until March 2003, Commission experts have acquired and examined post-war high-resolution imagery covering 353 sites, including those considered the most important. As part of the examination and analysis, experts have determined that approximately 70 of the sites were subjected to varying degrees of bomb damage.

In previous quarterly reports, UNMOVIC noted the reported looting and razing of sites that contained dual-use equipment and materials subject to monitoring, some of which have been discovered outside Iraq. The continuing examination of site imagery has revealed that approximately 90 of the total 353 sites analysed containing equipment and materials of relevance have been stripped and/or razed. Commission experts have also noted that repairs and new construction have begun at 10 sites.

They had been checking up until the time they were ordered by the US to leave just days before the war began.

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Originally posted by soficrow

But somehow, huge truck convoys with humongous cranes and other stuff on them can drive through the entire country unmolested and cross the borders...

Did they have papers? Stop at all the checkpoints? How did they get through? ...In an occupied country with otherwise trigger-happy US soldiers guarding Iraq's democracy and security...


.

You 'assume" the US had complete control of the entire country during the drive to bagdad.

No. I assume that huge truck convoys with humongous cranes and other stuff on them can't be missed. I assume there were at least a few strategic checkpoints. I assume that if UN satellites were monitoring the situation, so were US military satellites.

All things considered, I conclude that if those trucks and convoys got through, then it was because they were allowed to proceed.




PS. AceOfBase - sorry. Missed your thread. It's a good one.

[edit on 14-3-2005 by soficrow]

Wait a minute!!!
Are these the same weapons facilities that the liberal media said that Bush lied about?! Well if Bush lied about sadam's capabilities of making WMDs then how was it looted? Is this an admition from NYT that sadam was seeking WMDs afterall?

Does anybody remember when the place with the explosive was looted and soldiers just let it happened, I believe that they didn't no anything because they were had no orders to stop the looting.

Looting went rampant after the US invasion causing all the problems that our troops had after the very successful mission.

Our president though that they people had the right to loot, but forgot that they didn't needed control.

And what a mess Iraq turned out to be.


[edit on 14-3-2005 by marg6043]

Originally posted by Moon Puppy
Wait a minute!!!
Are these the same weapons facilities that the liberal media said that Bush lied about?! Well if Bush lied about sadam's capabilities of making WMDs then how was it looted? Is this an admition from NYT that sadam was seeking WMDs afterall?

It helps if you actually read the reports, moon puppy. That's why we publish them. For information. From the article above:

"Equipment for making parts for missiles, and chemical, biological and nuclear arms are missing from Iraq's abandoned unconventional weapons program. That program was the stated reason for the US-led invasion, but occupation forces did not find any unconventional arms. CIA inspectors concluded that the effort had been dormant since the 1991 Persian Gulf war. "


If you click on the link provided, you will find further explanation. But no, there is no admission that Iraq had WMDs.

There IS a lot of evidence suggesting that equipment from Iraq's old weapons program was systematically looted with US support.



.

Originally posted by soficrow

There IS a lot of evidence suggesting that equipment from Iraq's old weapons program was systematically looted with US support.



.

This is the same "Old" weapons programs that were suppose to be dismantled in accordance of UN resolutions. An OLD WMD program is no less dangerous than a new one is it not?

[edit on 14-3-2005 by Moon Puppy]

Originally posted by Moon Puppy
An OLD WMD program is no less dangerous than a new one is it not?

No kidding! Especially if the parts and equipment end up with Bush's buddies the bin Ladens in Saudi Arabia - and they get it all up and running.


.

as posted by soficrow
There IS a lot of evidence suggesting that equipment from Iraq's old weapons program was systematically looted with US support.

First off, your continued mockery of this makes no sense.
Gee, soficrow, I thought you anti-war and anti-Bush people asserted that Saddam had no WMDs or the capabilities, as indicated by your article, to even build or acquire them?! Seems to me that this New York 'slimes' report is contradicting just what you liberals have been saying all along, huh?
I guess in all your haste to check your sourcing or to collaborate this one, you missed this?
US satellites 'spot Iraqis hiding suspected arms
This is not the only or the first time that the US has had satellite imagery that indicated the hiding or moving out of Saddam's WMDs or related equipment, etc.

Saddam's $2m offer to WMD inspector
If Saddam offered a bribe to one WMD inspector, he undoubtedly offered bribes to multiples of them. Hmm, Scott Ritter come to mind?

Again, this topic has turned into another "Its Bush's and the US's fault" rhetorical session. The objectivity and fact finding has simply been null-in-void.

Please do carry on. ATSNN has provided an excellent 'platform' for which to work from and off of.





seekerof

[edit on 14-3-2005 by Seekerof]

YEAH! What he said!

Hey Seekerof, Rush is echoing us. He’s saying the same thing. Shouldn't be surprising as it's blatantly obvious

just remember, Peace is breaking out all over the MidEast and it's all Bush's Fault!

Originally posted by Seekerof

ATSNN has provided an excellent 'platform' for which to work from and off of.

IMO

Government Approved Propaganda on ATS More than Balances Alternate News


.

Part of the problem might be that the 3rd was unable to come in from the north. I am sure that had an impact on what happened.

Originally posted by Seekerof

First off, your continued mockery of this makes no sense.

Ooops, forgot which thread I was on. My apologies - am fluey, foggy.

...Back to the looting of Iraqi military installations. There were inactive installations. They were looted. Huge pieces of equipment like giant cranes were loaded onto trucks and taken out of the country - in convoys, in US-occupied Iraq - not "hidden" as Powell said in February of 2003.

Your reference Francis Harris has had her hands full in the UK fighting all these nasty rumors since January when she wrote that White House tries to allay fears over Bush militarism.

No wonder she "broke" the story about Saddam's $2m offer to a WMD inspector on Saturday.

Predictably, the Bush bullies choose character assassination every time they're caught redhanded.

FYI - It's not biased to address the issues and flag inconsistencies - and it's fascism to squash open enquiry.


.

So let me guess, the end all here is that Bush lied about WMDs before or after they went missing?

Question:
How can there be any components of or WMDs, as mentioned in the New York Times article, when there were none to start with, as asserted, claimed, and paraded by those (media included) that claimed Saddam did not have such prior to the war, and that Bush and the US invaded Iraq illegally?

It would appear to me that the New York Times article has invalidated the claims of those who said there was no WMDs or components thereof in Iraq. If so, then that would also invalidate those claims that Iraq was invaded illegally. It would also invalidate those claims that the Bush administration had lied about those WMDs and components thereof. But hey, you can still blame Bush and administration for not securing those WMDs and components thereof, huh?





seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof

Question:
How can there be any components of or WMDs, as mentioned in the New York Times article, when there were none to start with, as asserted, claimed, and paraded by those (media included) that claimed Saddam did not have such prior to the war, and that Bush and the US invaded Iraq illegally?

If you read the article, which normally is recommended, you will learn that the looted sites were inactive - and the CIA verified there were no weapons or weapons production.

It would appear to me that the New York Times article has invalidated the claims of those who said there was no WMDs or components thereof in Iraq.

Only because you did not bother to read the article.

If so, then that would also invalidate those claims that Iraq was invaded illegally. It would also invalidate those claims that the Bush administration had lied about those WMDs and components thereof.

Deny ignorance. Deny bias.

But hey, you can still blame Bush and administration for not securing those WMDs and components thereof, huh?

You are distorting facts and twisting words. ...90 sites were looted after the US occupied Baghdad. There were no WMD - but giant cranes and other equipment were loaded onto trucks and driven out of Iraq.

Presumably, there were checkpoints, and monitoring by US military satellites. The equipment is all gone, likely on the black market or in the hands of foreign governments.

Make of it what you will.



.

There are differences between a "screw" that once fitted onto a warhead, which was subsequenly disabled and dismantled by the UN in the 90's and a complete warhead.

There is absolutely no evidence of WMD's in Iraq, the evidence is quite clear;

1) None were used on US troops, this looks to be the biggest evidence.

2) None were ever found by US troops.

I really don't see how Bu#es can continue to argue that point, even Bush doesn't any more.