Sponsoring this...


Consume this...

Supplement with this...

Polling this...

Legalize this...




Watch this...



  • Jihadwatch_1

Advocate this...

Support this...

Blog Widget by LinkWithin

« Harmonicizing with this... | Main | Jacko just loses it over this... »

October 12, 2004

Comments

tallglassofmilk

Yeah... right.

billman

Yeah, there were no WMDs ... and "containment" was keeping Saddam weak.

I have a sudden taste for some Kool-Aid!

Ultra

I don't think anyone (or anyone who had a clue) claimed that there were no nuclear components in Iraq - remember Israel getting the go ahead to bomb Iraq's nuclear plant?

What have been lost have been dual use items, not WMDs. These items could be used to make WMDs, although with considerable effort.

A better question would be why these items weren't locked down better.

Moze

According to CNN:

"The kind of equipment we're talking about ... is the sort of thing that has a multitude of industrial applications," Gwozdecky said. "We were satisfied when we were in Iraq that it was not being used for a nuclear weapons program.
"In the wrong hands, it could be turned to use in a nuclear weapons program," he said. "Until we establish that this material is in responsible hands, we have to treat it as a serious proliferation concern."
Iraqi Interior Ministry adviser Sabah Kadhim acknowledged that much of the country's dual-use equipment was missing, charging that the looting was organized and carried out by "neighboring countries."

I explained dual use long ago. You can use Ammonium Nitrate (NH4NO3) to fertilize your lawn, or to blow stuff up. This is dual use.

In the U.S., I (and probably you) cannot buy Ammonium Nitrate, and were I to try to purchase some at the local Coop, I'd be lucky to get out the door with a stern "No" and some sinister stares.

Frankly, I find it laughable that the IAEA trusted Saddam with "dual use" nuclear matter more than the U.S. Government trusts me with Ammonium Nitrate. I choose not to give terms like "dual use material" the "nuance" that State Department psuedo intellectuals use to make nice with every tyrant and dictator under the sun...

Gwozdecky expresses concerns that these dual use materials remain in Responsible hands? Saddam's hands sharpened my views on "dual use."

[A better question would be why these items weren't locked down better.]

Iraq's Kadhim thinks Saddam's dual use nuclear matter were carried into neighboring countries.

Let's see. Iran, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kuwait... We all know there's no Al Qaeda in Iraq, but I think an argument can be made al Qaeda can be found in these Iraq neighbors, and that's bad because someone should have kept a closer eye on all that dangerous dual use material.

So it's "dual use nuclear matterial" when Saddam controls it, but potential nuclear proliferation in post-Iraq-war Middle East, as though Saddam wouldn't have used it to light us up first chance he got.

Give me a break...

Cheers,

Ultra

[So it's "dual use nuclear matterial" when Saddam controls it]
It's not even nuclear material, actually. There is, however, nuclear material in Iraq and undoubtedly in the neighboring nations as well. Is it a WMD? No, it's the component for one. Even a dirty bomb would be an iffy WMD.

It's one thing to have the inert lethal agent, it's another to have a device to hurl it thousands of miles, or a system to disperse it over a population. In terms of the equipment that falls under dual-use, many powers supplied Iraq with these prior to 1991 (the make nice with Saddam phase) and such are probably the materials now sought. You can find Senate Hearings on this, if you look.

[Frankly, I find it laughable that the IAEA trusted Saddam with "dual use" nuclear matter more than the U.S. Government trusts me with Ammonium Nitrate.]
I don't follow what you mean exactly. I wasn't the IAEA entrusting Saddam with the material and it wasn't the IAEA responsible for safeguarding such material. In the article, the IAEA blames the US security forces. I can scarcely find fault with what is largely a civilian group for failing to step into the middle of a conflict.

Moze

[It's one thing to have the inert lethal agent, it's another to have a device to hurl it thousands of miles, or a system to disperse it over a population... I don't follow what you mean exactly...]

Well then, let me put it to you this way. You can have a bag of Ammonium Nitrate in your garage, but that doesn't make you Timothy McVey. Similarly, you can be the leader of a country who has managed to procure "dual use" nuclear matter, but that doesn't make you Saddam Hussein.

What makes you Saddam Hussein is similar to what makes you Timothy McVey. Yes, I can fashion an explosive with Ammonium Nitrate, as surely as a motivated dictator can marshall the intellectual property and resources necessary to develop a tactical nuclear weapon. The difference is, I don't want to kill people and break things.

[You can find Senate Hearings on this [what constitutes dual use matter], if you look.]

Thanks. Already have.

Cheers,

The comments to this entry are closed.

Reciprocate this...

Bearing this...


  • Bfllogo

Latest additions to this...


Rolling this...