Skip to comments.NYT Reporting Friday, Sources Say: U.S. Posting of Iraq Nuke Docs on Web Could Have Helped Iran
Posted on 11/02/2006 7:14:31 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
Federal government set up Web site -- Operation Iraqi Freedom Document Portal -- to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war; detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research; a 'basic guide to building an atom bomb'... Officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency fear the information could help Iran develop nuclear arms... contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that the nuclear experts say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums...
Website now shut... Developing...
Dismantling would include destroying the documents. The major point is Sadam had dangerous information. From NRO:
The antiwar crowd is going to have to argue that the information somehow wasnt dangerous in the hands of Saddam Hussein, but was dangerous posted on the Internet. It doesnt work. It cant be both no threat to America and yet also somehow a threat to America once its in the hands of Iran.
Perhaps Mr. Siebert should have passed this brainstorm on to Krintong. He didn't seem to understand the concept.
If this was supposed to be a hit piece on the Bush administration, it has failed miserably.
Bush is famous for letting others seem to be the ones that accomplished the deed - he doesn't care that he doesn't get the credit as long as a thing gets done.
This might be the ultimate - he tricks the enemy into providing the information and, ultimately, delivering a big coup for our side -
Maybe I'm just really tired, but the NYT article seems to read that all the nuke docs are PRE Persian Gulf War and the reference in the article to Iraq "being as little as a year away" is referring to the timeframe before the Persian Gulf War and NOT 2002. I know that jveritas said Iraq even having nuke plans is a no-no but the Dems could argue that "everyone knew Iraq had a nuke program before the Persian Gulf War so that is old news, just like all the WMD's that have been found are pre Persian Gulf War so they don't really count" They will say this does not prove Bush right but rather incompetent.
Could this not be as bullet proof as we hope it is? What say you jveritas?
I wonder if he worked for the woman who wanted to do away with the restricted area security passes?
And this is why the Times has reported this story in the way they've reported it. These documents were all part of the documents that proved what the president had been saying all along about Iraq's quest for WMD.
First the Times says there were no reasons to go to war. The administraton and GOP says, "Yes, there were and we have the documents to prove it." Then the documents to prove it are shown and now the Times says it was irresponsible for the administration to show the proof.
Typical liberal argument. But too little, too late. The idea that Bush is responsible for Iran's future ability to produce a nuclear weapon is such a reach ti's laughable particularly since the website posting the documents has only been up since March of this year.
For the sake of history, thank you for the translations. I hope your efforts receive the proper recognition someday.
NYT: "Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Husseins scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away"
Notice the two phrases 1990s and 2002. How can Iraq be "as little as a year away" from building a bomb if they were referring to the 1990s (an entire decade)? When in the 1990s WHat year is he talking about? Unless the writer is referring to a SPECIFIC YEAR (ie 2002) the statement: "as little as a year away" makes no sense.
Keep an eye on Ortega. He could win Nicaragua's presidential election on Sunday - to Kerry's delight.
I am sure the writer will offer no apology for his botched joke.
This really is a hot potato for the dems. How can they come out and call the administration irresponsible for posting dangerous Iraq data when Iraq was supposedly not dangerous??
I'm sure Carter will be right there to help him on election day
They are referring to right after the Persian Gulf war ended.
Geeze. Guess the NYTimes thinks we would believe anything they published.
Be that as it may, the question still remains: If Hussein intended to disarm completely and go the straight and narrow route, why did he keep these "how to build a H-bomb" documents around?
I still think that this hurts really hurts the left. The argument that Iran only recently learned how t build a bomb, because of us is typical NY Slimes sophistry.
Gulf War ended 1991 - How is that "the 1990s and 2002"?
Thanks for providing this important information, jveritas.
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.