Posted on 09/08/2002 11:41:52 PM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:57:00 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Vice President Richard B. Cheney said yesterday that Saddam Hussein is "actively and aggressively" trying to build a nuclear bomb, and two key senators disclosed that U.S. officials have warned the Iraqi dictator that he and his country face "annihilation" if he deploys a weapon of mass destruction.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
I seem to recall the Brits were involved in the Manhattan project, notably Geoffrey Taylor & James Tuck. Don't know enough about the French to say how they got there.
That having been said, the precision required to build a nuke is overstated, especially when producing early designs (assuming that Iraq didn't get "bogus" designs). Of course, those designs needed to be carried on the largest bombers of the day (B-29s and B-36s), so you won't see them flying on SCUDs. Indeed, depending on the design chosen by Iraq, the timing issue is moot (again, that particular family of designs precludes both missile/artillery launches and very high yields). If, however, Iraq wanted nuke missiles/artillery, they would have to have access to advanced designs and precision.
Electronics, also, is highly fungible. Outside of the timing issue (only an issue with certain designs), the electronics used need not be overly-advanced. Iraq would not need nearly the same level of weapons safety that the rest of the nuclear world takes for granted, as even an accidental, premature detonation would fulfil Saddam's purposes. Morever, Saddam's not going to sit around for 42 years and watch his country literally fall apart without lashing out at least once with his nukes.
Along the lines of safety, the poor sod that's asked to deliver an Iraqi nuke and become an instant martyr for the Iraqi Islamist cause will NOT be making it back. As long as (a) he doesn't croak of radiation poisoning before he reaches his target and (b) his plane (could also be a ship; in fact if the target were US soil, it would almost have to be a ship) doesn't drop out of the sky due to radiation-induced metal fatigue, no one will care that he took enough rads to kill him inside of 2 weeks on the way to the target.
Outstanding line from our National Security Advisor!
I doubt it'll shake many people into growing a spine. The cowards, appeasment freaks, as well as the bitterly anti-American left will just say the possibility of a massive anthrax attack on the US is all the more reason why we should appease Saddam, but cloaking their cowardice under a PC "The United States should take a Cold War approach" label.
Actually, that is precisely the line Clinton has been pushing: if we attack Saddam, he'll use his biological weapons against the American people. In fact, he's going further than that. He's telling Bush that he mustn't point the finger at Saddam: that he must stick with the "loose network of Islamic extremists" theory that became de rigeur during Clinton's own eight-year Reign of Error. Clinton is taking on the role of Saddam's local agent -- like a Mano Nera enforcer -- spelling out to the blackmail victim what is required of them, and what the consequences will be if they don't submit. And, why not? Clinton's interests are totally aligned with Saddam's, are they not?
I certainly hope so. The Senate, led by Tommy, who's led by Hitlery, has only one goal in refusing to discuss war on Iraq: they want President Bush to lose the war on terrorism, so they can get back into control of the White House.
They could care less about terrorists attacking our country. Hitlery proved that by blithely stating in the beginning of October, 2001, WHILE WE WATCHED THE WTC STILL BURNING AND BODIES BEING RECOVERED, that President Bush's tax cuts caused the economy to falter. Disgusting buncha people. Traitors, every one.
The Oxford University Department of Chemistry believes so. In fact, the Brits (who invented VX) gave it to us in exchange for thermonuclear warhead information.
Seriously, I prefer ground temperature as measured 6 feet below the surface (room temperature could easily be 98.6 degrees). The other thing that could make Saddam's generals rethink their loyalties is getting cut off from the Republican Guard.
Someone with Saddam's resources can buy one though. Remember, in spite of Russian assurances that all of their weapons are accounted for, there were initial reports that they "lost" a couple, and their loss of enriched uranium is well known and has been a source of worry for years.
All Saddam has to do is buy some of the former Soviet Union's "lost" nukes, and hire the brainpower necessary to build more in the future. Remember, if he simply buys them...heck, for all we know his great buddy China provides him with them....then he doesn't have to build and test his own devices. We, therefore, wouldn't have any nuclear tests to detect, and cannot unequivocally say Saddam does have nukes.
I'm more worried about the possibility of chemical and biological weapons at the moment, though.
Exactly. Well said BUMP.
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.