Posted on 10/24/2004 7:21:04 PM PDT by icecold
Edited on 10/25/2004 6:42:02 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The administration has known this would probably be coming.. I'm sure they have something in the can ready to go.
I expect this story to be turned on it's head by Monday night.
Completely agree--that was my gut reaction.
http://www.fas.org/irp/gulf/intel/961031/0901pgv_91.txtne.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/latifiyah.htm
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/al_qa_qaa.htm
Exactly, I heard this weeks ago. It wasn't a big shock then and it isn't now.
Al Qa Qaa?
Al Caca!
How many flatbed semi-tractor trailers were needed to haul away 251-380 tons? Hauled to where?
Also, without the war, Saddam was free to sell or use the stuff however he wanted. I'd say the war is a wash regarding the status of this stuff.
If this were a devastating story to the Bush campaign, Rove would have leaked it months ago.
This is a snoozer.. Expect the Dims to have egg on there face by tomorrow night.
Really -calm down... this story , in itself, is not that big of a deal for about 10 reasons.
It's over here too:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/index-old.php
I've never, not once, heard of the bombings in Iraq being anything but IEDs, usually from 155mm warheads.
No one has ever asserted that the bombs are RDX.
I think we should all have a good look at what they decided to call this story. If you click the link, the story's html page name is 25bomb.html. Now one could think that this is in reference to the content of the story, but they use the word explosives...
No my friends, this is the NYTIMES october 25th bomb that they are trying to throw at our soon to be re-elected President. My personal opinion is that their "25bomb" will be a dud or may even backfire when we see what they chose to title this story as...
NO IT IS NOT! Dirt Dump Day is October 28. The Thursday before the election is the day the Democrats release bad stuff. That is the day that the LA Times released the story on Arnold.
This would be absolutely disgusting if the DNC were in with the terrorists in Iraq this week. On another thread, a newbie mentioned in relation to this article that it would be devastating for Bush if a few hundred soldiers died this week.
Please don't tell me Kerry has been consorting with our enemy again...I think I may be sick....
In 1996, the United Nations hauled away some of the HMX and used it to blow up Al Hakam, a vast Iraqi factory for making germ weapons.
And they kept telling us that Saddam didn't have any WMD after 1991!
380 TONS?!
Ok, who screwed up over at the Pentagon? This is embarassing.
This bull has been around for a while. They tried to pin missing equipment used for nuclear purposes on the administration and when that didn't work, I guess this was the best they could do.
It is serious, because the MSM is going to be all over it, and talk about nothing else.
anyone check Sandra Burgler's pants
OK. I just read the story. This story is a non-event. Not only is there little new news here, but if anything it just highlights the fact that Iraq was storing large amounts of explosives associated with nuclear weapons. There is no certainty how much if any of these explosives have been looted. Nor is there any proof that they have played any significant role in the insurgency over there. Using the previously mentioned 1 - 10 scale, I rate this story a boring 1.
This is an indictment of the UN and the IAEA and Kerry, for puting the safety of the world, in the hands of these incompetent/ corrupt dopes.
Who made the decision at the UN to allow Saddam Hussein to keep tons of devastating explosives for years ?
As long as the IAEA put a seal on the stuff, it was ok ?
Is that the new Kerry plan ?
This is like saying the Taliban was allowed to keep tons of explosives in Afghanistan- as long as the IAEA put some seals on the doors.
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.