Page 27 of 35 FirstFirst ... 172526272829 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 349

Thread: ISIS in Iraq seizes control of Saddam Husseinís chemical weapons facility

  1. #261
    Professor
    Checkerboard Strangler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Last Seen
    11-12-17 @ 02:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,475

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    That'd be the one.



    Yeah, I admit, I really don't get the Germans on this one.
    What was their payoff???
    If I didn't respond to your diatribe, it's possible you may have
    engaged in revisionism or broad sweeping generalizations.
    I don't have time for either, and you're probably on my IGNORE list.

  2. #262
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,894
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Those WMD were secured, until we gave the whole show away and let the Jihadists takeover.
    The sudden devastating defeat of the Iraqi army launched the open season on looting govt buildings, including suspected WMD sites. The looting of WMD site started as soon as the Iraqi army abandoned their posts.

    If you will recall, we were not able to secure these sites for quite some time after the invasion was underway.

    There was at least one WMD related place which was looted to the concrete foundation just after we invaded, April 2003 iirc.


    ETA


    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/13/in...=homepage&_r=0

    Looting at Weapons Plants Was Systematic, Iraqi Says
    By JAMES GLANZ and WILLIAM J. BROAD

    Published: March 13, 2005


    In the weeks after Baghdad fell in April 2003, looters systematically dismantled and removed tons of machinery from Saddam Hussein's most important weapons installations, including some with high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear arms...

    ...Sami al-Araji, the deputy minister of industry, said it appeared that a highly organized operation had pinpointed specific plants in search of valuable equipment, some of which could be used for both military and civilian applications...

    ...based largely on observations by government employees and officials who either worked at the sites or lived near them.

    "They came in with the cranes and the lorries, and they depleted the whole sites," Dr. Araji said. "They knew what they were doing; they knew what they want. This was sophisticated looting."

    ...the installations were left largely unguarded by allied forces in the chaotic months after the invasion.

    ...United Nations agency disclosed that approximately 90 important sites in Iraq had been looted or razed in that period.
    Last edited by Simon W. Moon; 06-20-14 at 11:15 PM.
    I may be wrong.

  3. #263
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-17 @ 06:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    15,248

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayton3 View Post
    ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant - Worldnews.com

    Reportedly the ISIS has seized control of Saddam Hussein's best chemical weapons plant and it STILL has stockpiles of Sarin, VX, and mustard gas.

    What happened what we've been hearing about for 12 years about "Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq".

    Now, you can say "oh they're old" (20 years plus).

    Who gives a damn. Lots of old weapons still work fine. The U.S. was using bombs built in WW2 during the Vietnam War.

    The U.S. was firing 16 inch gun rounds from the Iowa class battleship forty years later in Desert Storm.

    At any rate, supposedly, Iraq had NO WMDs which means NO CHEMICAL WEAPONS. And in fact supposedly had NO ABILITY to build them.

    Lots of people owe Bush/Cheney a big apology.
    If it's true I guess it's worth asking Bush/Cheney why they didn't destroy the stockpile after they won the war.
    "Groups with guitars are on the way out, Mr. Epstein"

    Dick Rowe, A & R man
    Decca Records
    London, 1962

  4. #264
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-17 @ 06:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    15,248

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by AJiveMan View Post
    Ask why the chemical weapons were not destroyed, when we were there.

    next......

    you're calling Bush a liar now. he admitted there were no wmd's, look on youtube for the video, it's there.
    Apparently it's Obama's fault that we didn't destroy whatever chemical weapons were in Iraq (and I have a very difficult time believing that if they actually existed, Bush would have had every reporter from every newspaper in the world there to see his vindication).
    "Groups with guitars are on the way out, Mr. Epstein"

    Dick Rowe, A & R man
    Decca Records
    London, 1962

  5. #265
    Professor
    Checkerboard Strangler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Last Seen
    11-12-17 @ 02:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,475

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    The sudden devastating defeat of the Iraqi army launched the open season on looting govt buildings, including suspected WMD sites. The looting of WMD site started as soon as the Iraqi army abandoned their posts.

    If you will recall, we were not able to secure these sites for quite some time after the invasion was underway.
    Well well well, guess that's what happens when the best equipped, most organized and most powerful military on the face of the Earth
    invades, right?

    Wrong.

    It's what happens when policy centers around such glib phrases as "you go to war with the army you have."
    It's what happens when people in a position of great power and responsibility actually BELIEVE "it will be over in four weeks",
    "it won't cost more than fifty billion dollars" and "we can pay for it with the oil we seize."

    It's one thing to spew stuff like that at the masses and politicians in both parties frequently do but when I hear crap like that I assume
    they don't actually believe it.

    Who in their right mind would dismiss an entire army and just send them packing without a long range plan as to their disposition?
    Word on the street was some of them were eager to be part of the transition, but apparently that was ignored, or did I imagine those reports?

    "We were unable to secure those sites?"
    Since we supposedly knew all about them, why didn't we make provisions for sufficient manpower to go directly TO them after neutralizing
    the place? Why wasn't that part and parcel of the overall plan?

    If a publicly traded corporation went about a large scale venture with that kind of planning isn't it reasonable to guess that the CEO
    would not only be out on his keister but possibly even brought up on charges?

    Many people have asked all of these questions for years. I am by far not the first person to do so.
    And I've heard every fracking excuse under the sun.
    It will be interesting to see if there are some new ones, because I don't expect to hear anyone admit that this was the most poorly planned,
    slapdash, ego driven, lackadaisical operation in the entire history of this country.

    And it could have been avoided if senior military had been allowed to do most of the planning, not glib politicians.
    It could have been avoided if it had been an official declaration of war, not "an operation".
    It could have been avoided if leadership hadn't insisted we work with cooked and cherry picked intel that sounded good but had little connection with
    reality.
    It could have been avoided if everyone had done away with all the ridiculous religious overtones and starry eyed faith based pablums.
    It could have been avoided if it hadn't been couched in overly brute emotional arguments and belligerent swagger.

    War is a science.
    The religious right in this country, which is what was in power during the runup and execution of the Iraq War, does not believe in science,
    and they routinely dismiss the reality based community as a blasphemous antagonist to their biblical fairy tales.
    If I didn't respond to your diatribe, it's possible you may have
    engaged in revisionism or broad sweeping generalizations.
    I don't have time for either, and you're probably on my IGNORE list.

  6. #266
    Professor
    Checkerboard Strangler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Last Seen
    11-12-17 @ 02:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,475

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by wiggen View Post
    apparently it's obama's fault that we didn't destroy whatever chemical weapons were in iraq (and i have a very difficult time believing that if they actually existed, bush would have had every reporter from every newspaper in the world there to see his vindication).
    bingo!
    If I didn't respond to your diatribe, it's possible you may have
    engaged in revisionism or broad sweeping generalizations.
    I don't have time for either, and you're probably on my IGNORE list.

  7. #267
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,894
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Oh yeah, al Qa'Qaa


    Background

    In October 2004, the Iraqi interim government warned the U.S. that nearly 380 tons of conventional explosives had been removed from the Al-Qa'qaa facility. The Bush Administration was criticized for failing to guard known weapons stashes of this size after the invasion. Critics of the Bush Administration claimed that U.S. forces were to blame for the looting, which put weapons that were formerly under UN control into the hands of insurgents.

    The Bush Administration asserted before the 2004 U.S. election that the explosives were either removed by Iraq before invaders captured the facility, or properly accounted for by US forces,[2] even while White House and Pentagon officials acknowledged that they had vanished after the invasion.[3]
    MSNBC News wrote:
    "Whether Saddam Hussein's forces removed the explosives before U.S. forces arrived April 3, 2003, or whether they fell into the hands of looters and insurgents afterward ó because the site was not guarded by U.S. troops ó has become a key issue in the campaign."[4] Time Magazine reported the sequence of events: "In late April IAEA's chief weapons inspector for Iraq warned the U.S. of the vulnerability of the site, and in May 2003, an internal IAEA memo warned that terrorists could be looting "the greatest explosives bonanza in history." Seventeen months later, on Oct. 10, in response to a long-standing request from the IAEA to account for sensitive materials, the interim Iraqi government notified the agency that al-Qaqaa had been stripped clean. The White House learned about the notification a few days later."[5]

    Evidence indicated that the explosives were most likely removed after invading US forces captured the facility. The looting was witnessed by U.S. Army reservists and National Guardsman from separate units as well as officials of the new Iraqi government.[6] Frank Rich editorialized in the New York Times (May 15, 2005):
    It's also because of incompetent Pentagon planning that other troops may now be victims of weapons looted from Saddam's munitions depots after the fall of Baghdad. Yet when The New York Times reported one such looting incident, in Al Qaqaa, before the election, the administration and many in the blogosphere reflexively branded the story fraudulent. But the story was true. It was later corroborated not only by United States Army reservists and national guardsmen who spoke to The Los Angeles Times but also by Iraq's own deputy minister of industry, who told The New York Times two months ago that Al Qaqaa was only one of many such weapon caches hijacked on America's undermanned post-invasion watch.
    For a timeline of events resulting in the storage and subsequent loss of the high explosives, please see Al Qa'qaa high explosives timeline.





    I suspect that much of whatever is useable and worth having from al Muthanna is long gone.
    I may be wrong.

  8. #268
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,649

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    According to our government they are useless period.
    "The facility in Al Muthanna is said to still contain a stockpile of old weapons. However, the militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams will have a hard time using them, even if they manage to access them, the Wall Street Journal reported.

    According to the U.S., the weapons are old, contaminated and hard to move. "We remain concerned about the seizure of any military site by the ISIL," Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said in a written statement according to the Journal. "We do not believe that the complex contains CW materials of military value and it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to safely move the materials."

    However, a survey of the site conducted by the Iraq Study Group determined the facility has since been dismantled, and that existing weapons stockpiles was sealed and unusable, the Journal said."

    According to U.S. officials, the seizure of the Muthanna complex, though attention grabbing, is meaningless as far as concerns for usage of chemical weapons goes."
    Iraqi militants ISIS seize Saddam's top chemical weapons facility - Middle East Israel News | Haaretz


    They didn't say they were "useless period", they said they are not of "military value", which actually doesn't matter since nobody expects ISIL to use them for military purposes. "Military value" would mean that the payload would need to be in a functional delivery mechanism (rocket, mortar round, artillery shell) and of sufficient potency to be released in open air. That doesn't rule out use in subways or office buildings which are closed systems and non military.

    The question still remains: Would you stand in a room where one of those munitions was opened?
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  9. #269
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Lol !

    " Sealed " ?

    What exactly does that mean ? Like welded shut ?

    Bolted shut ? Is there a Child proof cap that MIGHT keep a toddler or curious Chimpanzee from killing themself ?

    Because nothing is " Sealed " absolutely.

    And " unusable " implies that all existing chemical stockpiles have been rendered inert, so no reason to " seal " them right ?
    Dismantled, obsolete, contaminated, and are sealed and unusable. End of story.


  10. #270
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    They didn't say they were "useless period", they said they are not of "military value", which actually doesn't matter since nobody expects ISIL to use them for military purposes. "Military value" would mean that the payload would need to be in a functional delivery mechanism (rocket, mortar round, artillery shell) and of sufficient potency to be released in open air. That doesn't rule out use in subways or office buildings which are closed systems and non military.

    The question still remains: Would you stand in a room where one of those munitions was opened?
    "However, a survey of the site conducted by the Iraq Study Group determined the facility has since been dismantled, and that existing weapons stockpiles was sealed and unusable"


Page 27 of 35 FirstFirst ... 172526272829 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •