Posted on 06/20/2014 8:45:04 AM PDT by caligatrux
BAGHDAD — American and Iraqi officials have completed nearly the last chapter in dismantling Saddam Hussein’s nuclear program with the removal of hundreds of tons of natural uranium from the country’s main nuclear site. The uranium, which was removed several weeks ago, arrived in Canada over the weekend, according to officials. The removal was first reported by The Associated Press.
[snip]
American military personnel helped move about 600 tons of uranium in the form called yellowcake. It had been stored at Tuwaitha, an installation 12 miles south of Baghdad, which had been the site of Iraq’s nuclear program.
[snip]
This was not the first time that the United States intervened to remove potentially harmful nuclear material from Iraq. Just a few days before the Americans formally transferred sovereignty back to Iraq in June 2004, they removed 1.8 tons of low-enriched uranium, as well as other radioactive sources, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
[snip]
After the American invasion in 2003, Tuwaitha was looted. Barrels used to store the yellowcake were stolen and sold to local people, who used them to store water and food and to wash clothes, according to a report by the atomic energy agency.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Oh, you mean the ones that Hillary Clinton and John Kerry also said Saddam possessed?
Can anyone explain to me how there are still facilities for manufacturing Sarin and other chemical weapons????
Why did we not level those facilities???
I’m still waiting for anyone to show me where Bush lied.
But . . . but that's different
Hmmm. The MSM will not be pleased with this thread. It violates a Sacred Lib Rule:
Since 97% of all articles written about Iraq’s “supposed” WMDs declare that none were found then, by consensus, none were found. Any evidence to the contrary, even if verified by multiple sources, cannot be cited since doing so would violate the Consensus Rule.
Thanks for posting this!
You need to stop grasping at straws.
The NeoCons have said they were wrong, there were no WMDs. Bush has also said that, as has Rove and Cheney.
Who cares what Rove thinks. Only Fox news seems too. Bush and Cheney did what they did for the safety of thousands of Americans still in Iraq and the Iraqi people. They bit the bullet and lied about NO WMD when they knew their was. All the info was classified anyway, as it should have been.
That yellowcake in Iraq predated the reports that Wilson sought to debunk that Iraq was continuing to try to buy more yellowcake.
In the liberal mind it made sense to be outraged that Bush used the British intel about Iraqi yellowcake shopping in Niger as a “pretense” to add to the case of evidence that Saddam was still pursuing nukes
While ignoring the fact that Saddam had 500 tons of yellowcake already stockpiled, and why ...
LOL! Do you think Iraq bought 550 tons of Nigerien yellowcake as landfill, and then kept it for 20 years for no reason other than to give UN inspectors a job? Or maybe he expected he could just wait out the west and then carry on.
If we had left Saddam’s residual uranium stockpile there at Tuwaitha, at the site of the 1981 Israeli-bombed Osirak nuclear reactor, and if ISIS had it now, I wonder if libs would still be all cool with it..
As factcheck points out, Bush stopped claiming there were WMD long before he left office, so if you want to argue, go argue with Bush.
Most people think that the NeoCons actually played a roll in contriving the mis-info about Iraqi WMDs so they could use it as a pretext to invade.
Bush stopped defending himself in his second term, He basically abandoned us to the democrats and crawled in a hole. Maybe history will tell us why someday.. Still he was better than having Kerry as president.
“Most people think that the NeoCons actually played a roll in contriving the mis-info about Iraqi WMDs so they could use it as a pretext to invade.”
actually that doesn’t apply to “most people”
Too many of us have friends and friends of friends who have served in Iraq and saw and reported and supported what we were trying to do there
You are confusing “most people” with the preponderance of “opinion” on the internet from libspeak and the lamestream MEdia
btw wth is a NEOCON? Talk about a lame term
There was no “misinformation” about Iraqi. Maybe some wrong intelligence from inbred agency exchanges that kept repeating and embellishing on the same reports and sources ... there was at least one documented attempt of false report fed into the system to twist the Niger uranium story- but not by a US source
but no organized program of misinformation fed to US Congress, our allies, the CIA director, and the President of the US to lead us to war
sorry to bust your bubble
Quite the opposite.
By using NeoCon, I am implying that this is an issue of foreign policy doctrine, not political parties. Keep in mind that the NeoCons had never before been in a position of authority over foreign policy. In fact, George Bush campaigned on a Realist foreign policy doctrine.
If you go back to 2002 and 03, there were numerous Republican Realists who never believed the "intelligence" about WMDs in Iraq. And, as doubt about the veracity of the "intelligence" began to grow, those Realists who initially believed the "intelligence", were the earliest to stop believing.
Myself, I actually believed the story about WMDs in Iraq. I can't tell you exactly when I stopped believing because it was a gradual realization. Certainly, by the time it became apparent that SoS Powell would serve only one term that I probably knew.
As for you saying "while Rome burns", it burned a long time ago.
This is/was an issue that most people wanted let die as part of the past. But now, all the NeoCons are out and about in a coordinated full court press advocating for re-invading Iraq. And the best way to stop that is shine the light on what the NeoCons did in the first place.
I understand. You think the uranium mentioned in this article is a wmd.
We know there were WMD’s. No question. What was at question was were those the WMD that GWB and Cheney were referring too ? The New York times admitted there were plenty of WMD components, but all were known to the UN, so they do not count. Bull crap. The UN itself admitting it did not know what was in the bunkers it sealed because leakage made it impossible to survey the bunkers. And those bunkers are now controlled by Al Qaeda. We have no clue what they are gonna pull out of those sealed bunkers. The only people who would know, are former Baathists now working with ISIS. So when thousands are killed by your unknown unknown, what will you say then ?
There are simple reasons why Bush et. al. dropped the claims. Many of those have to do with security issues, classified issues, terrorist issues, etc. etc. But the main reason was the next president was going to bomb Libya/Syria and they did not want the public to know that bombing WMD facilities created so many problems in Iraq. So the fools that bought the no wmd line, actually made Libya and Syria possible. The air assault on Syria was delayed at the last minute, but still could occur.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.