Proof that Iraq DID have nuclear weapons! - Page 3

Volker · 07-07-08, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteEU

Naw Portugal sucks, we going after France, prettier girls!

But I aint spanish

It's an "by Bush's logic after Pearl Harbour we should have attacked Brazil" variation, I guess.

shuamort · 07-07-08, 03:58 PM

cherokee · 07-07-08, 06:45 PM

What do you get when you mix the "yellowcake" with a few bricks of C4?
How about if you pack the inside of a missile or rocket with this chit?

Lerxst · 07-07-08, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cherokee

What do you get when you mix the "yellowcake" with a few bricks of C4?
How about if you pack the inside of a missile or rocket with this chit?

You get something nasty I suppose. I think the point is that this is from before the first Gulf War and everybody knew about it and knew where it was. Which is kinda the point of smacking this thread around. If Saddam was gonna use it for those purposes he had years to do it. But he didn't.

obvious Child · 07-07-08, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffMerriman

You get something nasty I suppose.

Not really. All you do is scatter yellowcake around. Not a very effective dirty bomb unless it's mostly pure uranium (which begs the question why are you using it in a dirty bomb?). A terrorist would do significantly better by buying up huge amounts of cheap watches and glow in the dark clocks, harvest their radioactive material and use it rather then yellow cake.

Doc Howl · 07-08-08, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon

Yawn. This was known to be there before the war started. It was under lock and key and subject to inspections until the war started.

What the concern should be is that it has taken this long to secure and remove it.

The answer, of course, is that nobody really ever took the WMD thing seriously, at least in the government.

It was all bull****, all along. Of course, after our little national nervous breakdown around 9/11/2001, most people were still panicky enough to go for an obvious and transparent lie.

Vader · 07-08-08, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Volker

Do you actually read your own sources?

If yes, please try to explain me, how this proves, that Iraq had nuclear weapons.

If Iraq didn't have WMDs or the means to construct them, WHY WOULD THEY NEED 500 TONS OF ENRICHED URANIUM OR PLUTONIUM?

THINK ABOUT IT?

WHAT WOULD THEY BE USING ENRICHED MATERIALS OF ANY KIND?

Energy? NO -

I see the liberal coalition of DP has decided to do what they always do!

None of you have the balls to admit you were wrong.

Vader · 07-08-08, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc Howl

The answer, of course, is that nobody really ever took the WMD thing seriously, at least in the government.

It was all bull****, all along. Of course, after our little national nervous breakdown around 9/11/2001, most people were still panicky enough to go for an obvious and transparent lie.

That might be the liberal POV but it is not what most Americans believe.