deyes

How would we have found them by now when the means to do so are stil being developed?

deyes

You caught me.

Well then we'll reserve judgement until that time that it is done then, no?

We're both guilty of that. But it does bring light to the fact that there is no proof, which makes for a weak argument does it not?

Did that make you feel smart?

syncopation

iTrader: (3)

yep

All I'm saying is if your gonna be a smart *** then at least bring the smart too.

deyes

Oh, its already been broughten!

syncopation

iTrader: (3)

lol

it's all about the strategery

deyes

Lol!

SilverScoober02

Still waiting on someone to answer this for us, Guru, Salty, deyes???

To me that is even more important than the WMD thing. The sad thing is these "missing" explosives are probably going to be used to kill coalition troops

deyes

I'm outraged! Did we know it was there before we went in? If so why did we not plan for it? Who was in charge of securing these types of facillities? Was it just that we were unable to secure that facillity before other objectives were accomplished, or was it completely overlooked?

SilverScoober02

You should be....Obviously we knew about it because it was at a old WMD factory. I don't know about you guys but I would think that protecting 380 tons of conventional explosives would be a high priority thing for the military. At least move them somewhere where they can be easily protected. As if the threat of getting killed or mamed by a roadside bomb is bad enough our troops get to worry about which John Q Terrorist got his hands on enough explosives to wipe out the Eastern Seaboard!!!!!!!!! Sadly there will be no shortage of bomb making materials for terrorists in Iraq now. As it is I am sure this will just get "swept under the rug" by the current administration....broom in hand all the while telling everyone that the conflict in Iraq is going great!

deyes

Who was in charge of securing these types of facillities? Was it just that we were unable to secure that facillity before other objectives were accomplished, or was it completely overlooked? Someone in charge screwed up, but I'm not convinced that the president is necessarily to blame. But as in most cases there is plenty of blame to go around.

syncopation

iTrader: (3)

Maybe the article is down?

qoute:
"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.....Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished sometime after the American-led invasion last year."
unquote

Let me retract the statement that this was being guarded by our military, it was not. Apparently the responsibility falls on the Coalition Provisional Authority, an American-led entity that was the highest civilian authority in Iraq until it handed sovereignty of the country over to the interim government on June 28.

But let me ask this...should this have been guarded by our military? Salty, I'm assuming you may have some munitions experience, what are your thoughts?

subaruguru

In terms of WMD's: If this is a facility that needed guarding because the transfer of these materials to terrorists would create a grave threat, then Saddam had the capability to enable terrorists to start their own WMD programs. This is one of Bush's key points, and it's also something that came out in the reports. Saddam was waiting for international pressure to die off so that he could resume what he had shut down. His bribery of UN officials is further evidence of this.

Now, on the issue of technology, if you're familiar with this, you know that it is utterly and completely impossible to search an entire country for objects smaller than the size of an enormous building. Even a bunker is hard enough to find in an area thousands of square miles large. The "whole country" scan is a myth. Without knowing roughly where to look, you won't find in a sandbox the size of Iraq.

syncopation

iTrader: (3)

These are conventional weapons that can be purchased easily in a number of countries and are not tracked. Why I think they should be guarded is that now pedestrian militants are able to obtain them freely and easily, which could bring more harm to our troops stationed in Iraq. Since there is no Al Qaeda/Iraq connection known, the most likely outlet for these weapons will be against coalition forces in Iraq.

Sure Saddam could have enabled the terrorists, but Al Qaeda and Iraq had no connections!!!!! Stop thinking that Saddam was meeting with Osama, they never played golf on the weekends!!! They didn't have a time share in Monaco. Perhaps you mean other terrorists? Maybe he would enable the Haganah (yeah, right). Please be specific when you write 'terrorist' and don't confuse them with militants.

Yeah, this is one of Bush's points, but he is confusing you. Don't let him think for you. Any building contractor/demolotion contractor (OK, you need to be certified)can get this stuff, so does this mean they could possibly "enable the terrorists?"

Please don't tell me what is impossible technologically unless you have some serious education/background to back this up. If you are ignorant of the technology of which I write, then you should take some E & M physics and start with the elementary concept of a metal detector. I did not say it was easy, can do it in a day, cheap, inexpensive, or anything else of the sort. It is a time consuming process that is being done/has been going on since the gulf war. Opposite to some opinions, we do not have soldiers digging holes when a divining rod starts to quiver.

Hard to find and impossible to find are not the same thing.

subaruguru

First of all, I'd like to know in what country over the counter sales of the specific items and explosives that were supposed to be guarded are allowed. Of those countries, how many allow foreign nationals to undertake such purchases for export without acting on behalf of a state.

The Saddam terrorism connection has nothing to do with personal contacts. He was a known sponsor of terrorism, as he sponsored suicide bombings and publically stated on numerous occasions that one of his primary goals was to destroy Israel. That gives him an aligned interest with terrorists everywhere, and there's no reason to assume he wouldn't have ever acted on that. He may have in the past. As you said, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Now, as to your request for "education" in the physics of this I have something better: First hand accounts from numerous intelligence officers as to the search capabilities of the United States. I've personally seen George Tenet, though he didn't speak about intelligence gathering capabilities the time I saw, and several of the faculty at my former institution are retired CIA and continue to advise on matters of intelligence gathering and national security. Now, you may have taken a physics course of something...but that's not going to give you direct experience with intelligence gathering techniques. So, if you've got something that demonstrates my information is dated (current as of 2003), I'd be glad to hear it. If not, I'd recommend you do some studying of your own.

bassplayrr

iTrader: (9)

The fact that they can't just be bought "over the counter" only highlights what a major F up this is. Sure, I guess Sadaam could have given this stuff to terrorists, but seeing as how he had it in a secure location shows that he didn't. This stuff didn't get stolen under Sadaam's watch, it got stolen under ours. We basically just gave this stuff to the terrorists (whome otherwise would have a hard time getting ahold of it in this large of a quantity) this stuff for FREE. If you are trying to hint that the fact Sadaam had ordinary explosives was reason enough to invade Iraq, I question your sanity.

-Chris