Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Saddam Tried to Build Nuclear ICBM
NewsMax.com ^ | Friday, June 29, 2007 | Stewart Stogel

Posted on 06/29/2007 9:40:30 PM PDT by Anita1

UNITED NATIONS -- In a wide-ranging compendium on Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programs, the U.N. Monitoring, Observation, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) reveals that in late 1989, Saddam's military launched a modified Scud missile that could have carried a nuclear warhead. In a document released on Thursday, UNMOVIC states . . . Iraq's deputy prime minister, Tariq Aziz, repeatedly waved off Western concerns about the missile program. Now, it has become clear that such concerns were justified . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: documents; iraq; missileprogram; nuclear; proliferation; saddam; tariqaziz; wmd
"In its only test flight on Dec. 5, 1989, the Al Abid space launch vehicle flew for about 45 seconds before encountering (an unidentified) problem. This space launch vehicle consisting of five Scud engines for its first stage had the potential to deliver a payload, including nuclear, to an intercontinental range."

The issue of Iraqi nuclear missiles had been periodically raised by Russian authorities when it became known that the Al Abid missile had the potential of reaching Moscow.

The missile was also believed capable of reaching as far west as Paris.

Iraq's deputy prime minister, Tariq Aziz, repeatedly waved off Western concerns about the missile program.

Now, it has become clear that such concerns were justified.

The 1,160-page report to be examined by the U.N. Security Council on Friday is likely to be the last by the U.N. inspectors. The U.S. and the UK intend to introduce a resolution to disband the inspection unit.

Down from more than 300 personnel, the remaining 34 UNMOVIC staffers had spent most of their time these days analyzing docuements they had impounded before Saddam was overthrown in 2003.

They NEED to have MORE staffers - NOT less!

jveritas: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1718125/posts

1 posted on 06/29/2007 9:40:32 PM PDT by Anita1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Anita1

No, that’s not possible, so many Freepers have told me Saddam was never a threat...


2 posted on 06/29/2007 9:56:22 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Capitalize on victory--push the fence now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback

That’s funny. I seem to remember a whole bunch who “knew” bin Laden was dead too.


3 posted on 06/29/2007 10:06:03 PM PDT by Rocky Mountain High
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

ping


4 posted on 06/29/2007 10:15:55 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1718125/posts


5 posted on 06/29/2007 10:24:50 PM PDT by Anita1 (Hunter for President in '08!! Huckabee for VP!! A Winning Ticket!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

Scuds themselves were notoriously inaccurate. Did Saddam’s weapons developers think they could target this thing more precisely than, say, half a hemisphere?


6 posted on 06/29/2007 10:27:00 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1
And oldie but goodie, thanks for remembering it :)
7 posted on 06/29/2007 10:28:14 PM PDT by jveritas (Support the Commander in Chief in Times of War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: piasa
If we did not remove him, Saddam would have rebuilt his nuclear weapon program and the missiles and ICBMs to deliver it. I have zero doubt that he was going to do it.

God bless our troops.

8 posted on 06/29/2007 10:30:59 PM PDT by jveritas (Support the Commander in Chief in Times of War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

Another reason that George the 1st should have finished the job in ‘91 instead of letting Saddam off the hook.


9 posted on 06/29/2007 10:51:01 PM PDT by mkjessup (Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1
Wow, this story's really taken off, huh?

All it does is prove Saddam was looking to acquire and use nukes, no big deal.

10 posted on 06/30/2007 12:07:25 AM PDT by Darkwolf377 (Bostonian, atheist, prolifer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
"Saddam would have rebuilt his nuclear weapon program "

Why aren't the American masses in overjoyed that they know for sure Saddam can never deliver a nuclear device? Or give praise that we severely destroyed Saddam's capability back in 1991, without witch Saddam's Iraq would have been a nuclear power?

11 posted on 06/30/2007 12:31:24 AM PDT by endthematrix (a globalized and integrated world - which is coming, one way or the other. - Hillary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Anita1
No doubt, Saddam would have tried to build a nuke missile vehicle had we not choked his regime with our embargo.

He didn't have the money to pursue such programs. I'd guess that he was using up old SCUD equipment he had on hand. The Russians appear to have largely cut him off since he owed them $8 billion with little prospects of repayment. I think they were only selling him stuff for cash in his last years.

In the end, he chose to retain his working SCUDs instead of cannibalizing them to try to build an entirely new type of missile. It would be interesting to know how much help he was receiving from Russian and North Korean advisers on this project.
12 posted on 06/30/2007 1:14:49 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudi: tough on terror, scared of Iowa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Did Saddam’s weapons developers think they could target this thing more precisely than, say, half a hemisphere?

Just how accurate do you have to be with a nuclear tipped missile?

13 posted on 06/30/2007 3:27:06 AM PDT by Go Gordon (The short fortune teller who escaped from prison was a small medium at large.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Go Gordon
Just how accurate do you have to be with a nuclear tipped missile?

And it's fallout.

14 posted on 06/30/2007 3:52:58 AM PDT by TYVets (God so loved the world he didn't send a committee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback
No, that’s not possible, so many Freepers have told me Saddam was never a threat...

It's only a WMD if it's aimed at liberal interests.

15 posted on 06/30/2007 8:07:54 AM PDT by Alex Murphy (As heard on the Amish Radio Network! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1675029/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

There are Scuds and there is the Al-Hussein. The missiles that Saddam launched during Gulf War I were Al-Husseins. The Iraqis chopped up three Russian Scuds to make two Al-Hussein, which had longer range and a smaller payload.

The Scud had pretty good accuracy, a coupla hundred meters CEP. The Al-Hussein, like the Scud, was non-separating by design. The longer range by itself would lead to larger errors, obviously. The problems of the Al-Hussein were multiplied by the fact that it was aerodynamically unstable on reentry and would oscillate violently in angle of attack. (Not a prescription for accuracy in a ballistic missile.) The oscillations would cause the jury rigged airframe (bits of one and a half Scuds welded together by crack Iraqi craftsmen) to break up which did not enhance its accuracy very much.

It still had like a kilometer size CEP and could hit cities and posed a threat to large targets like airbases.

There is still the problem of “carrying a nuclear warhead”? During the 1950’s the question was, “Would the AEC make ballistic missiles practical?” Early nuclear weapons needed something the size of a B-29 to carry them. It took the U.S. years of effort and billions of dollars to make nuclear weapons light and rugged enough to be carried by ballistic missiles.

Hussein spent about ten billion ( 1e10) dollars on his nuclear weapons program prior to Gulf War I; he had 100,000 people working full time for ten years on nuclear weapons. He may have been about a year away from making a nuclear weapon in 1990. Had he waited, the invasion of Kuwait may have been completely unnecessary.


16 posted on 07/01/2007 7:38:45 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (I never consented to live in the Camp of the Saints.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback
Yeah..and EVERYone knows that:

bad guys in the middle east + other bad guys in the middle east = no cause for concern

/sarc

17 posted on 07/01/2007 7:42:17 AM PDT by NordP (HUNTER: "The real question for Mexico--Why are your people crossing burning deserts to get away?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson