Explosives stolen in Iraq

[vidcc]

There is no proof yet that the story is false hank...there is lots of spin on it.... The republicans playing it down saying it could have gone missing before the army got there and the democrats saying it could have gone missing after the army got there...both have a possibility of being correct. The site wasn't fully searched or secured after the army arrived, the Army are saying this.
Now i have accepted the possibility that it may have gone missing before...why can't you accept that it may have gone missing after?.....after all you made the point of quoting someone that said knowbody knows the truth.
Why would 60 mins. need to run the show anymore.? the cat's out of the bag and most media stations are reporting fresh stuff as it happens.

Again hank i have to state that only the timing of the removal is being disbuted...not the removal

[hobbes]

Maintain the illusion perhaps?

So one would simply bypass the legitimate threat to create an illusion that they were looking for something. Would fit nicely, except that the military was constantly detonating conventional weapons caches as they were uncovered on the march toward Baghdad. Why ignore this one?

Conspiracy is so much more fun than reality. You don't have to prove anything, just suggest it as a possibility.

Right now, the board is asking us to prove that those weapons didn't exist. When we proved to them that the WMD didn't exist, they got all pissed. I'm at a loss as to how to please some people.

[vidcc]

Biggles,

Why ignore conventional stockpiles and attempt to find weapons (WMD) that you know don't exist?

Not my question to answer but I do believe that bush thought, as the rest of the world thought at the time, that saddam had WMD. That's why conventional weapons were ignored.
But we now know this was incorrect and was based on bad intelligence.


I wonder though as we actually knew about this particular site and it's contents why it wasn't destroyed by air attack on the first couple of days. If it was because they thought it contained bio or nuclear weapons why was there so little effort to search and secure it as priority before moving into Bagdad?

Edit:

Right now, the board is asking us to prove that those weapons didn't exist. When we proved to them that the WMD didn't exist, they got all pissed. I'm at a loss as to how to please some people.

This wasn't WMD it was explosives that could be used for certain WMD but is also for civil engineering

[hobbes]

Not my question to answer but I do believe that bush thought, as the rest of the world thought at the time, that saddam had WMD. That's why conventional weapons were ignored.
But we now know this was incorrect and was based on bad intelligence.

I asked the question because I have been getting the feeling that several forum members do not accept Biggles assumption that Bush ever thought SAddam had WMD.

Too me, this point totally changes everything.

Were he to have believed that WMD were there and acted to circumvent the inefficiency of the UN, that portends much less ominously than going in fully knowing that no weapons were there.

I was just interested in knowing what people thought about Biggles assumption.

[hobbes]

Edit:
This wasn't WMD it was explosives that could be used for certain WMD but is also for civil engineering

In an earlier post, it was stated that those weapons (the conventional stockpile this thread is about) never existed. The rebuttal was, prove they didn't exist.

I just found this amusing because everyone got so pissed off when we proved that WMD didn't exist by invading Iraq, but now they want us to prove that these conventional weapons didn't exist. That is irony.

I don't know or care about this stockpile, there are caches of weapons all over Iraq, this is just one. It was the irony which amused me.

[vidcc]

I see.....

Well if i wanted to make a conspiracy theory out of it i would suggest bush knew the truth but isn't as dumb as we have been making out and kept it to himself...... if you want to pull a stunt on such world scale proportions the fewer people in on it the better

just a theory

[hobbes]

I see.....

Well if i wanted to make a conspiracy theory out of it i would suggest bush knew the truth but isn't as dumb as we have been making out and kept it to himself...... if you want to pull a stunt on such world scale proportions the fewer people in on it the better

just a theory

Funny you should say that Vidcc.

Today at lunch I stated that I had misunderestimated my appetite. I then went on to say "Fool me once appetite, shame on me, no you.... You won't fool me again, is what I mean".

I postulated that this buffoonery was a facade to mask his genious as the puppetmaster in a global conspiracy. But to me he is hamming up the act a bit.

[Busyman]

I asked the question because I have been getting the feeling that several forum members do not accept Biggles assumption that Bush ever thought SAddam had WMD.

Too me, this point totally changes everything.

Were he to have believed that WMD were there and acted to circumvent the inefficiency of the UN, that portends much less ominously than going in fully knowing that no weapons were there.

I was just interested in knowing what people thought about Biggles assumption.

There's the possibility that he rushed to war and thought he might get lucky.

[Biggles]

There was an enormous effort to find WMD. It was, after all, the raison d'etre for the war. To not look might have seemed - well odd

Saddam did have WMD and used them against the Iranians.

I did not at the time believe the intelligence reports showed Saddam was an imminent threat and considered the spin placed on his dangerousness somewhat overplayed. I was, however, mildly surprised that the UN had so successfully removed his WMD capability. (A Brownie point to the UN?)

The obfustication that Saddam pursued from about 98 onwards was perhaps not so much to fool us but rather his regional enemies who he would like to have think he was still a power to be reckoned with. Oh what tangled webs we weave!

Iraq is awash with weapons - almost all his neighbours disliked him and Iraq had a large army. Securing all the conventional weapons will be a major task. If this particular piece of looting took place (and boy did they loot) then it is a shame as the UN did have seals on the place and reported its contents. The explosives missing are perfect for car bombs and as there are car bombs daily it would suggest that the insurgents have all the explosives they need. If the story is a fraud then one must assume they looted their explosives from another site.

[hobbes]

There was an enormous effort to find WMD. It was, after all, the raison d'etre for the war. To not look might have seemed - well odd

Odd perhaps, but why leave this stockpile which was apparently a known entity and which may now be the source of car bombs, when detonating so many others?

It would seem to me that blowing up conventional stockpiles would in no way impede an apparent search for WMD. In fact, knowing that they would never be found, I would go to all the real threats first. I would blow them up quite demonstratively to show the public just what a threat Saddam was. "Look at all this stuff people. You know we're on the trail."


I think the conspiracy theorists need to become a little more creative, I've pretty much trumped their little diversion scenario in 1 cup of coffee.