NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6376212/

Missing prewar stockpiles
may total 250,000 tons

Here's the part that really gets my blood boiling

Among the sites that don’t appear to have been secured was a cache of hundreds of surface-to-surface warheads at the 2nd Military College in Baqouba, 35 miles northeast of Baghdad. Each warhead is believed to have contained 57 pounds of high explosives.

And this, refusing help that could have helped secure sites:

David Albright, a former U.N. inspector, said the sheer volume of weapons stored across Iraq should have prompted the United States to invite inspectors back to check on key sites such as Al-Qaqaa.

Instead, he told the AP, “there was a lot of arrogance” on the part of U.S. officials who rebuffed the International Atomic Energy Agency’s repeated requests to resume general inspections.

And sooner or later, we will see the U.S. burn, bombed with weapons from Iraq. With greetings from the international community. *smirks*

The 380 tons are relatively small potatoes, considering the size of Saddam's arsenal. There were an estimated million tons of weapons and explosives in 8,700 weapons depots, several as large as 10 miles by 10 miles square, according to the Iraq Survey Group.

Of this, the United States has destroyed some 280,000 tons, and has prepared 160,000 tons more for demolition. The 380 tons missing from Al-Qaqaa amount to less four-hundredths of 1 percent (.004) of the total estimated weapons and munitions in Iraq, less than two-tenths of a percent of what already has been destroyed.

'Only 377 tons'

A grenade is a few pounds of explosive. Thats 754,000 pounds of explosive. They may be especially powerful explosives too, where one pound is plenty enough to do the job.

If we lose 10,000 extra troops because we aren't guarding these explosives well enough, its not that big of a deal, right? We have hundreds of thousands in the country.

Hmm...

I have a curious question.

Which is safer, Saddam Hussein's Iraq or an Anarchic Iraq under Occupation missing 250000 tons of weaponry???

The 380 tons are relatively small potatoes, considering the size of Saddam's arsenal. There were an estimated million tons of weapons and explosives in 8,700 weapons depots, several as large as 10 miles by 10 miles square, according to the Iraq Survey Group.

Of this, the United States has destroyed some 280,000 tons, and has prepared 160,000 tons more for demolition. The 380 tons missing from Al-Qaqaa amount to less four-hundredths of 1 percent (.004) of the total estimated weapons and munitions in Iraq, less than two-tenths of a percent of what already has been destroyed.


Okay, nice job rattling off the talking points there. Way to miss the whole point.

Okay, so the 440,000 of tons that have been secured or destroyed make up less than half of what is predicted to be there. That's the point. There are anywhere from 200,000 to 600,000 tons (depending on who you listen to,) of explosives and ammunition that are unaccounted for (to be fair, that doesn't mean it is missing...but it certainly doesn't mean it's secure.)

380 tons of explosives may be small potatoes when compared the the amount that's out there, but 380 tons of explosives is still a lot of explosives, and it's 1/1000 of what is out there that is still unaccounted for.

So, we have all this stuff out there in the desert. No one knows if it's being looted or not (which, unfortunately, probably means it is,) and the Bush administration was turning away help? Even if it's incompetent help (as the Bush people would like you to believe,) it's better than nothing.

Hmm...

I have a curious question.

Which is safer, Saddam Hussein's Iraq or an Anarchic Iraq under Occupation missing 250000 tons of weaponry???

Saddam Hussein's iraq was very stable. He was a very moderate leader. He wasn't theocratic, or fundamentalist. He did not support terrorism, and was an enemy of Iran's. He had a thing for torture and oppresion, but so what? America supports these people when it fits for them(South America, Iran pre-revolution, etc).

Saddam posed no international threat either, he had no working WMD system, was not funding terrorism, and sanctions had obliterated his army.

Yeah just as if Iran gets .0000000001 percent of the worlds uranium. It probably is enough. Terrrorists dont use massive firpower spending millions of tons of explosives. They do 1 attack using 1000. I really dont think it is a big issue because of that. However,when the administration doesnt admit any mistakes you wonder, can they see this. If the Bush administration had said it was a glitch in the system and are working to prevent this from happening in the future fine. However, they say everything is going prefectly.

With that said, no matter what has hapened to them its the administrations fault. If they were moved before the war, they are now in the hands of terrorists. If they moved them after the war, they are now in the hands of terrorists. After all the Iraq Survey Group could of easily find 250 tonnes of explosives. However, now they are most likely sitting in Syria somewhere or maybe Falluja. One of the reasons I was against the war was because if saddam had WMD there is no way he would sit and watch the Americans come and take them. He would move them months beforehand and most likely would hide them. As the Americans advanced IF Saddam had WMD they most likely are now in the hands of the Insurgency. If you are trying to get something where 1 pound of anthrax is deadly and your searching a country full of people against you. ITs impossible.

That is IF he had WMD. If he didnt the war wasnt justified.

Im bassing this on the fact that if Saddam could hide the weapons from weapon inspectors for 8 years, he probably could hide them from the US army for 1 year. Especially with some 6 month period of warning.

Bush supporters, yes or no:

As a result of the war, are there more, or are there less people now in the Middle East who hate America and have access to weapons and explosives?

Bush supporters, yes or no:

As a result of the war, are there more, or are there less people now in the Middle East who hate America and have access to weapons and explosives?
There are more people now not living under the yoke of Saddam, not fearing that today might be the dya that their son or daughter is taken away to a rape/tourture room, not worried that their entire village will be gassed by saddam.

You didn't answer the question. Answer that question first, and then I will address your point about the people no longer being under the yoke of Saddam.

Reality check guys...

Are American troops being constantly attacked by militia armed with looted weapons and an effectively infinite supply of ammunition?

Yes.

Arguments over precise quantities are missing the point. Somewhere out there, enough stuff got looted to make sure that any angry man who wants an assault rifle and RPG, can obtain one without hassle. We don't have to argue over the precise tonnage of equipment at a specific site to know that a hell of a lot of Iraqi army armouries got taken apart by the locals.

Bush supporters, yes or no:

As a result of the war, are there more, or are there less people now in the Middle East who hate America and have access to weapons and explosives?


Middle East? Or just Iraq? Either way, the way you phrased this question leads me to believe you have your own opinion about it and are just waiting for the opportunity to share. So, I'll bite. My opinion (since I'm not in the Middle East to take a poll or anything) would be that there are less people who both a. hate America and b. have access to weapons and explosives. Reasoning? As already pointed out, the previous post speaking of the freed Iraqis and their families no longer in terror from their own government. Add to that the hundreds of thousands of tons of weaponry/explosives that ARE accounted for and destroyed/scheduled for demolition. Fewer people, less weaponry to go around.

Middle East? Or just Iraq? Either way, the way you phrased this question leads me to believe you have your own opinion about it and are just waiting for the opportunity to share. So, I'll bite. My opinion (since I'm not in the Middle East to take a poll or anything) would be that there are less people who both a. hate America and b. have access to weapons and explosives. Reasoning? As already pointed out, the previous post speaking of the freed Iraqis and their families no longer in terror from their own government. Add to that the hundreds of thousands of tons of weaponry/explosives that ARE accounted for and destroyed/scheduled for demolition. Fewer people, less weaponry to go around.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. So you're saying that because there are less weapons, they are less available. That would be true if it wasn't for the fact that Saddam was a paranoid dictator who had a problem with sharing. Anyone trying to steal his weaponry would likely end up with a serious case of dead.
Second point. You are saying that because Saddam is gone, people like America more, even though polling evidence done has shown that MORE people dislike and distrust America. Furthermore there are people who are armed who believe thay are defending their homeland against the US. Just look at Iraq. Does that seem like a pacified region? Wasn't it better when their anger was directed at Saddam? Even Bush's team states how foreign fighters are streaming across the borders (that Bush failed to protect,) and now they have the weapons to really fight us.

There are more people now not living under the yoke of Saddam, not fearing that today might be the dya that their son or daughter is taken away to a rape/tourture room, not worried that their entire village will be gassed by saddam.

Yes, because Saddam would just gas entire villages from time to time.

And now, people instead worry about their house falling on top of them with a big shiney "made in the US" bomb comming down with it.

Look, unless you were protesting Saddam's treatment of his people BEFORE Iraq was brought up by Saddam-and you weren't, because NOBODY was-you have NO moral high ground whatsoever. Nobody gave a fuck about Iraq until after we blew the shit out of it.

First off, yes Sadam, sons and crew needed to be removed and I'm glad their gone. But as far as rape and torture rooms, Natural Choice, remember Abu Gharib (spelling?) and the actions of some of our troops in that prison? So it was just a few bad apples out of the bunch? Fair nuff. I'll readily state that the vast majority of our troops over in Iraq and in Afghanistan are doing the best they can. The problem is who knows what else has happened at Guantanamo, in Afghanistan, and in other American held locations that we haven't been told of (yet)? We are OCCUPYING Iraq, and no one likes to be occupied except those who profit from it - not the average citizens of Iraq or the Middle East.

Next, Palestine! :headbang: Does Israel have the right to exist? Of course. And Palestinians shouldn't be blowing themselves up to kill Israeli's, but if Israel continue to practice the policies :sniper: they have in Palestine and we continue to support Israel with weapons and military vehicles then it doesn't matter what happens in Iraq. No easy answers for this one, but this lovely little corner of hell is doing great things for America's image in the Arab world.

Last, as to the original point of this thread, let's not forget that the missing explosives can be used to detonate NUCLEAR DEVICES!!! Bad. Really Bad. And even if terrorists don't have fissionable material to be detonated by these explosives, as has been pointed out in previous posts, 1 Ton - let alone however many tons actually are missing - can be broken down into gods only know how many IED's. Add to this that if even only one percent or one tenth or one hundreth of one percent of insurgents infiltrating the Iraqi police and military forces have access to these explosives then the outcome is damned ugly.

Thanks George! Bang up job! (no pun intended)

Long Live Matalatataka!
Mahatma Matt

I didn't miss any point. I read the original article in the NYtimes and it implied that there were thousands of tons of missing munitions and that they disappeared after the US invaded. Those points have been proven false in the subsequent documentation in the press. The munitions in question weren't there when the US landed.

Oh and the US is safer and I seriously doubt the amount of Arabs that hate the US and want to kill its citizens have changed at all.

And sooner or later, we will see the U.S. burn, bombed with weapons from Iraq. With greetings from the international community. *smirks*


Your posts so disgust me. Even if the idiocy that you think will happen comes to pass, would you really smirk at people getting bombed? Any people. Repeatedly you talk about how JUST it will be when the US is attacked by terrorists. You equate stationing troops with the permission of a sovereign govt(Saudi Arabia) and defending a people from Genocide(Israel) with justification for various terrorists attacks against innocent people who have nothing to do with American foreign policy.

Everytime I see one of your hateful posts I have to remind myself that you must be some mewling little brat and not at all reflective of the German people.

I didn't miss any point. I read the original article in the NYtimes and it implied that there were thousands of tons of missing munitions and that they disappeared after the US invaded. Those points have been proven false in the subsequent documentation in the press. The munitions in question weren't there when the US landed.

Oh and the US is safer and I seriously doubt the amount of Arabs that hate the US and want to kill its citizens have changed at all.
I guess you only read local news that feeds you your favourite brand of daily BS? Try reading some articles by Arab news sources and you just might change your answer, and if you didn't change your answer, then you obviously will remain uneducated to the truth? :eek:

Bush supporters, yes or no:

As a result of the war, are there more, or are there less people now in the Middle East who hate America and have access to weapons and explosives?
I am not a Bush supporter but I can answer the question: YES

US Report on Iraqi Weapons Deepens Arab Hostility Towards America: Analysts

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1007-08.htm

An interesting read for sure. And NO......America is NOT safer since the start of the war on terrorism.

So, if some sells you cheap fireworks then you know where it comes from!

The only problem with reading Arab news report and such is that there are always people in the higher ups of any organization that will change the truth (or say they are giving their "slant" to it) to get more readers....if your country is very anti-(insert country here) then the news about said country will be slanted toward the viewpoint that any enemies of that country are great people with a wonderful culture blah blah blah...while the country that the "reporter" dislikes will have any mistakes or opinions blown out of proportion so that it sounds like they are truly the bad guy...its the nature of personal opinions and propaganda.....the only way to know the truth is to be there...when it happens...otherwise you are only reading an induviduals perception (or in the case of propaganda desired reader reponse) of the event that occured....a good case in point think about every time you read about a Palestinian/Israli conflict and think about what they call the actions on both sides (i love reading those sicne palestenians almost always take more losses than the israeli's yet the israeli's always talk about their own dead more and about how they were innocent bystanders while even non activist civilians in the palestien region are always called insurgents or terrorist-while on the other side in palestine the opposite is said to be true in the news)

All I got to say is mmmmmm peanuts

Hey! I thought the US armed Saddam! SO ... how come all these "missing weapons" and explosives are of Soviet vintage?

Aw. I was hoping there would be exploding peanuts.

Aw. I was hoping there would be exploding peanuts.


Mmmmm exploding penuts!

b/c when the USSR started to collapse it started selling almost every piece of software/hardware and just plain nasty arsenal it had...no one is at fault for this now since the country collapsed but everyone has a piece of their military now...half the third world countries use their radar and aircraft they made equipment that while not as good as the american systems is more failsafe and last longer without high amounts of mateniance/ think about it...if your paying for a mercenary or uneducated army would you use american hardware which while being more accurate etc... needs specialized maitenance or would you use soviet hardware which anyone with hands can use and take care of? plus they were selling it wholesale anyway so why not

*mumbles*
often times with large surface to surface warheads, you need a special kind of detonator to get the bomb going. The one's that those bombs had probably were either radar or impact, and neither would work. It also depends upon what type of material you are using, for example, if you drop a container of Nitroglycerin in the floor you're dead, but if you drop some plastic explosives, typically you just bend over and pick it up whilst saying "I wish they'd clean these floors more so that hair doesn't get mixed in with this sticky gooey plastic explosive" I'd be willing to be that the insurgents would have taken these weapons somewhere, found that a large portion probably aren't useful, and dumped 'em in the desert.

I don't think the quantity missing from that site was the problem. The real issue is that the troops didn't seem to think that securing the site was a priority. I'd say it's a safe assumption that the leaders directing those troops did not believe protecting those munitions was important. And now, that's biting us in the ass.


There are a lot of Iraqis who are glad Saddam is gone - but most of them probably didn't have a problem with the US before anyway.
But, there are a lot of Iraqis who feel they are being occupied...a lot who have lost a loved one to errant US bombs...or have been incarcerated by the US troops with no charges... Those people may not have hated us before, but I bet they do now. :(

380 tons is peanuts compaired to, let's say, 100,000 pounds!

380 tons is peanuts compaired to, let's say, 100,000 pounds!

This is sarcastic I assume? Just in case, I'll point out that 380 tons = 760,000 pounds.