380 TONS of explosives gone missing in Iraq

[question]

VIENNA, Austria (CNN) -- Some 380 tons of explosives, powerful enough to be used to detonate nuclear warheads, are missing from a former Iraqi military facility that was supposed to be under American control, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog says.

Melissa Fleming, spokeswoman for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told CNN the Iraqi interim government reported several days ago that the explosives were missing from the Al Qaqaa complex, south of Baghdad.

The explosives -- considered powerful enough to demolish buildings or detonate nuclear warheads -- were under IAEA control until the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003. IAEA workers left the country before the fighting began.

"Our immediate concern is that if the explosives did fall into the wrong hands they could be used to commit terrorist acts and some of the bombings that we've seen," Fleming said. She said the IAEA doesn't know if some of the explosives may already have been used.

A European diplomat told The New York Times that Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the IAEA, is "extremely concerned" about the potentially "devastating consequences" of the vanished stockpile.

"The immediate danger" of the lost stockpiles is its potential use by insurgents to make small, but powerful, explosive devices, an expert said. The expert said the explosives could be easily transported across the Middle East.

According to The Times, the stockpiles missing from Al Qaqaa are the strongest and fastest in common use by militaries around the globe.

The Iraqi letter to IAEA identified the vanished explosives as containing 194.7 metric tons of HMX, or "high melting point explosive," 141.2 metric tons of RDX, or "rapid detonation explosive," among other designations, and 5.8 metric tons of PETN, or "pentaerythritol tetranitrate."

Fleming said the IAEA, whose mission is to keep track of everything with potential nuclear weapons applications, had been monitoring about 100 sites in Iraq, but there were only a few of special concern, including Al Qaqaa.

"The concern is that other sites that have items that are potentially dangerous have gone missing," Fleming added.

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry decried the missing explosives, after seeing The New York Times report in Monday's editions.

In the statement, Kerry senior adviser Joe Lockhart said: "The Bush administration must answer for what may be the most grave and catastrophic mistake in a tragic series of blunders in Iraq.

"How did they fail to secure nearly 380 tons of known, deadly explosives despite clear warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency to do so? And why was this information unearthed by reporters -- and was it covered up by our national security officials?

"These explosives can be used to blow up airplanes, level buildings, attack our troops and detonate nuclear weapons. The Bush administration knew where this stockpile was, but took no action to secure the site."

Kerry criticized Bush for his "stunning incompetence."

There was no response from the Bush administration on the missing explosives.

[taken from: CNN.com]

It's also being reported on NPR that the US and Iraqi governments were aware of hte missing explosives, and hadn't notified the UN because they were trying to find them. I smell COVERUP! Let's see who the Bush administration blames this one on.

[Ash]

OPPS.......

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by question

Kerry criticized Bush for his "stunning incompetence."

Yes, I think that it the phrase I have been looking for - "stunning incompetence."

entire story here

Now, it seems another 377 tons of high-power explosives are gone. The thrust of the Times story is that they are missing because of the Bush administration's carelessness right after the liberation. But even International Atomic Energy Agency experts cited in the Times report say Iraqi officials probably removed the explosives prior to the war. These experts, it is true, contend that the officials didn’t take them far from Al Qadaa. But how do they know? According to administration sources, Coalition forces were at the site during and after hostilities and searched roughly 30 bunkers and 90 other buildings. They found nothing under IAEA "seal." This raises the possibility that the bunkers the agency had sealed prior to the war were broken into, and the explosives taken, before or during the war, making it nearly impossible to stop. Indeed, NBC Nightly News reported Monday that NBC was embedded with the Army’s 101st Airborne when they searched the site three weeks into the war and confirmed that none of the powerful explosives were found.

so this is neither new information - nor a failure of our troops - it does look like an attempt to sit on a story and release it timed to do the most damage... not unlike the Bush DWI story last election....

Originally Posted by xiannaix

entire story here





so this is neither new information - nor a failure of our troops - it does look like an attempt to sit on a story and release it timed to do the most damage... not unlike the Bush DWI story last election....

Would you happen to have any other comments about the matter rather than insinuating some political motive? For instance, do you think this is a bad thing? Or is your mind already made up now and in the future that no matter whatever happens in the end, the War is Just and Bush is a Hero in the truest Greek form?

Originally Posted by jay

Would you happen to have any other comments about the matter rather than insinuating some political motive? For instance, do you think this is a bad thing? Or is your mind already made up now and in the future that no matter whatever happens in the end, the War is Just and Bush is a Hero in the truest Greek form?

I didn't insinuate - I stated quite clearly that the timing of the article resembled the release of the DWI story.

[Johnny Funk]

Originally Posted by Ash

OPPS.......

What are you talking about? Nothing is wrong in Iraq. Everything is okay.

I don't care what the media says, we are doing a great job.

Originally Posted by xiannaix

I didn't insinuate - I stated quite clearly that the timing of the article resembled the release of the DWI story.

In other words, no you have nothing concrete or compelling to say.

I have to say that I'm surprised you get the respect on here that you do. Clearly you can string some Big Words together in a concise manner and that's good as far as it goes. But your thinking is quite limited and corrupted by a slavish devotion to your ideology which leaves you with no room for revisions.

The principal difference between people like you and people like me is that we are able to revise our opinions based on new data while the Bush supporters (here's where you come in) are seemingly unable to do this. New data, if it's negative, makes them even more shrill than before. Or it makes them suggest that it's all a Big Plot Against Their Guy, as you did. The data are never considered, the sources are always suspect (even the totally mainstream sources), pointing out the data is unpatriotic, etc. In fact, your own lockstep mentality is a reflection of the same unquestioning lockstep loyalty that Bush and his handlers demand from those immediatly around him. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the Bush supporters share the same paranoia and other disorders their leaders evidence.

I feel confidant in making the prediction that no matter what happens you will never, indeed it's consciously impossible for you, to change your opinion on Bush.

And there's another difference; I have no illusions that John Kerry is the next Savior of Mankind. He's just a guy. Unlike you and your devotion to the Bush Machine, I have nothing invested in Kerry or any other politician for that matter. I prefer to look at individuals rather than an Ideology. But at this point, for me and plenty of others, it comes down to a sort of political Hippocratic Oath; first, do no harm. I think Kerry will do less harm to the United States than Bush has done. Will he be perfect? Of course not. Will he even be mediocre? Maybe not. But's it's hard to imagine him being more destructive to this country and its place in the world than Bush has been. Kerry would have to try really, really hard to accomplish that.

Originally Posted by jay

In other words, no you have nothing concrete or compelling to say.

Did you read the article I posted in response to the original thread coments?

Originally Posted by jay

In other words, no you have nothing concrete or compelling to say.

I have to say that I'm surprised you get the respect on here that you do. Clearly you can string some Big Words together in a concise manner and that's good as far as it goes. But your thinking is quite limited and corrupted by a slavish devotion to your ideology which leaves you with no room for revisions.

The principal difference between people like you and people like me is that we are able to revise our opinions based on new data while the Bush supporters (here's where you come in) are seemingly unable to do this. New data, if it's negative, makes them even more shrill than before. Or it makes them suggest that it's all a Big Plot Against Their Guy, as you did. The data are never considered, the sources are always suspect (even the totally mainstream sources), pointing out the data is unpatriotic, etc. In fact, your own lockstep mentality is a reflection of the same unquestioning lockstep loyalty that Bush and his handlers demand from those immediatly around him. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the Bush supporters share the same paranoia and other disorders their leaders evidence.

I feel confidant in making the prediction that no matter what happens you will never, indeed it's consciously impossible for you, to change your opinion on Bush.

And there's another difference; I have no illusions that John Kerry is the next Savior of Mankind. He's just a guy. Unlike you and your devotion to the Bush Machine, I have nothing invested in Kerry or any other politician for that matter. I prefer to look at individuals rather than an Ideology. But at this point, for me and plenty of others, it comes down to a sort of political Hippocratic Oath; first, do no harm. I think Kerry will do less harm to the United States than Bush has done. Will he be perfect? Of course not. Will he even be mediocre? Maybe not. But's it's hard to imagine him being more destructive to this country and its place in the world than Bush has been. Kerry would have to try really, really hard to accomplish that.

As for your attack on me - how impolite (and inaccurate) of you -

Originally Posted by xiannaix

Did you read the article I posted in response to the original thread coments?

Of course I did. And that has nothing to do with my reply above. My reply was directed at your seeming to see a Democrat-inspired Conspiracy Bogeyman under every story that might reflect poorly on your Chosen One. Well, that and the fact that none of you guys might ever make a mistake, EVER. Anyway, good luck with your ideology, guy. Something tells me that over the long term, you're all going to need luck in a big way...

Originally Posted by jay

Of course I did. And that has nothing to do with my reply above. My reply was directed at your seeming to see a Democrat-inspired Conspiracy Bogeyman under every story that might reflect poorly on your Chosen One. Well, that and the fact that none of you guys might ever make a mistake, EVER. Anyway, good luck with your ideology, guy. Something tells me that over the long term, you're all going to need luck in a big way...

This would have been the first time I ever suggested that a story was released with calculated timing to harm Bush.

I didn't say it was - I said it looked a lot like the DWI story (I believe the Dem who released the info is on record admitting having withheld and released the info in a calculated manner).

[johnny861]

Apparently, reports are starting to say that it happened before we even invaded Iraq.

Apparently, the IAEA had tagged those explosives and had gone back a second time before the war started. The next group of people to come in contact with the cache' were US Marines accompanied by two journalist who shot footage of the explosives.

I guess we'll find out over the next few days whether the missing explosives were taken before US Military arrival or not...

[h0x0rb0b]

http://homepage.mac.com/napoleoncole...e.WMV-link.WMV