Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Y3a · Jul 21, 2004, 09:31 AM

Nuclear arms reportedly found in Iraq

Baghdad, Iraq, Jul. 21 (UPI) -- Iraqi security reportedly discovered three missiles carrying nuclear heads concealed in a concrete trench northwest of Baghdad, official sources said Wednesday.

The official daily al-Sabah quoted the sources as saying the missiles were discovered in trenches near the city of Tikrit, the hometown of ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

"The three missiles were discovered by chance when the Iraqi security forces captured former Baath party official Khoder al-Douri who revealed during interrogation the location of the missiles saying they carried nuclear heads," the sources said.

They pointed out that the missiles were actually discovered in the trenches lying under six meters of concrete and designed in a way to unable sophisticated sensors from discovering nuclear radiation.

spacefreak · Jul 21, 2004, 09:34 AM

Iraq's Interior Minister said it was a stupid report, but apparently the story is still developing.

So I guess we'll wait and see.

Logic · Jul 21, 2004, 09:35 AM

again?

Y3a · Jul 21, 2004, 09:35 AM

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's Interior Ministry dismissed as "stupid" a report in a local newspaper on Wednesday that said three nuclear missiles had been found near the town of Tikrit.

A senior U.S. military official told reporters he had no information on the report in the newspaper al-Sabah. He said officials were checking the report.

================================================== =

This will be interesting to see WHO GOT IT RIGHT UPI or Reuters...

Logic · Jul 21, 2004, 09:38 AM

Takes even shorter time than before to discredit the "finds". Ah, well. It's getting closer to election time, just wait for the "rumours" about OBL being captured to come out just before the election. But for some reason they won't be able to confirm it.........

voodoo · Jul 21, 2004, 09:40 AM

If nukes will ever be found in Al Iraq the word will come from the US administration FIRST, not CNN. Looks better PR wise.

stevesnj · Jul 21, 2004, 09:47 AM

Wow WMD's found a few months before an election...things that make you go hmmmmm

angaq0k · Jul 21, 2004, 11:29 AM

those WMDs must feel sooooooooo lonely.....

BRussell · Jul 21, 2004, 11:33 AM

Jeez how many times has this happened? At some point, if real WMDs are found, no one is going to believe it anyway.

itistoday · Jul 21, 2004, 11:46 AM

Just in time for elections! Coincidence? I think not...

(don't see anything on CNN about it...)

ThinkInsane · Jul 21, 2004, 12:14 PM

A local newspaper in Iraq reports something, the US officials say they have no information about the report, and yet somehow this is a conspiracy to gain votes before the election? I guess I have a hard time following that logic.

Spliffdaddy · Jul 21, 2004, 12:18 PM

When Kerry loses, there needs to be a conspiracy - else it makes the liberals wrong.

PacHead · Jul 21, 2004, 12:22 PM

Everything is a conspiracy theory to certain people on the left. There will always be some excuse.

As for this story, we'll have to see and wait how it pans out, but if true, it is indeed a SMACKDOWN.

stevesnj · Jul 21, 2004, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
A local...and yet somehow this is a conspiracy to gain votes before the election? I guess I have a hard time following that logic.

I guess invading Iraq was logical in the first place.

voodoo · Jul 21, 2004, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by PacHead:
Everything is a conspiracy theory to certain people on the left. There will always be some excuse.

As for this story, we'll have to see and wait how it pans out, but if true, it is indeed a SMACKDOWN.

Indeed, but it probably isn't true considering the source.

tie · Jul 21, 2004, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by Y3a:
This will be interesting to see WHO GOT IT RIGHT UPI or Reuters...

Gosh, one never knows!! Such suspense.. This could really be it!

If so, then Bush was right after all. He didn't lie about Iraq's nuclear program. He simply made a judgement call based on documents known to be forgeries, and in retrospect he was dead on. That's what counts. This is really devastating to me, a die-hard libby who loves France, but then I am glad that the US knew what it was doing all along. Zimphire, feel free to say 'I told you so,' then award yourself a smackdown.

For some odd reason, the liberal media seems to have stopped covering WMD finds with the drama they deserve. It is great that MacNN members are still on top of WMD developments. Thanks, Y3a!

RAILhead · Jul 21, 2004, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by itistoday:
Just in time for elections! Coincidence? I think not...

(don't see anything on CNN about it...)

Just in time for elections? Where I live, the election isn't until November, which is still several months away.

Maury

itistoday · Jul 21, 2004, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by RAILhead:
Just in time for elections? Where I live, the election isn't until November, which is still several months away.

Maury

Well, you can't just brainwash people overnight, silly. It takes time and lots of planning, especially in a Democracy like America.

:dragonflypro: · Jul 21, 2004, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by itistoday:
Well, you can't just brainwash people overnight, silly. It takes time and lots of planning, especially in a Democracy like America.

Believe me, the rhetoric has just begun!

Invictus · Jul 21, 2004, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by PacHead:
Everything is a conspiracy theory to certain people on the left. There will always be some excuse.

As for this story, we'll have to see and wait how it pans out, but if true, it is indeed a SMACKDOWN.

This from a guy who thinks there is a Canadian conspiracy out to destroy the U.S. and has been 'Samackdowned' so many times he should have virtual bruises on his noggin.

I can't seem to find any info. Is there a link please.

Spliffdaddy · Jul 21, 2004, 05:14 PM

If this is true, it's gonna make Dubya the hero of the century.

Logic · Jul 21, 2004, 05:16 PM

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
If this is true, it's gonna make Dubya the hero of the century.

Well, it's only 96 years left of the century so that's not such a great achievement.

Spliffdaddy · Jul 21, 2004, 05:21 PM

Depends on what his daughter, Jenna, accomplishes as president in the future.

(hey, we can all hope)

Logic · Jul 21, 2004, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Depends on what his daughter, Jenna, accomplishes as president in the future.

(hey, we can all hope)

Dream you mean?

Wet dream for you, while a nightmare for me

BRussell · Jul 21, 2004, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Depends on what his daughter, Jenna, accomplishes as president in the future.

(hey, we can all hope)

PacHead · Jul 21, 2004, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by Invictus:
This from a guy who thinks there is a Canadian conspiracy out to destroy the U.S. and has been 'Samackdowned' so many times he should have virtual bruises on his noggin.

And this is from a guy who manages to tell two lies in the very same sentence. Take your ad-hominem garbage and peddle it somewhere else. There's plenty of other forums on the net that will welcome such simplistic debating techniques that you employ.

How about you discuss the topic at hand instead of me. If you want to discuss me, I suggest you make your own "I love PacHead" forum and moderate it.

Face Ache · Jul 21, 2004, 07:01 PM

Erm... Hillary Duff is on the front of the UPI web site.

OMG SHE HAS A MICROPHONE! STEP AWAAAAY FROM THE MIKE!

Someone get a sniper on that rooftop!

angaq0k · Jul 21, 2004, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by PacHead:

"Good-day, Mistress Crow," he cried. "How well you are looking to-day: how glossy your feathers; how bright your eye. I feel sure your voice must surpass that of other birds, just as your figure does; let me hear but one song from you that I may greet you as the Queen of Birds."

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Jul 21, 2004, 07:36 PM

Eeeeesh.

For once I wish both sides would just wait until something is conclusive before starting in with the nah, nah, nah's.

Relax people, chances are great that eventually WMD evidence in Iraq will be found, the left will spin great conspiracy yarns about it and deny they were ever wrong, the right will say "Told ya so, you naive dummies that gave a thug like Saddam the benefit of the doubt," and around and around it will go.

But at least wait until something is conclusive one way or another.

angaq0k · Jul 21, 2004, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Eeeeesh.

For once I wish both sides would just wait until something is conclusive before starting in with the nah, nah, nah's.

Relax people, chances are great that eventually WMD evidence in Iraq will be found, the left will spin great conspiracy yarns about it and deny they were ever wrong, the right will say "Told ya so, you naive dummies that gave a thug like Saddam the benefit of the doubt," and around and around it will go.

But at least wait until something is conclusive one way or another.

Actually, probabilities are that so far, with time, chances of finding WMDs get lower...

Spliffdaddy · Jul 21, 2004, 08:12 PM

Say what you want about Hillary Duff, but Spliffdaddy has a good idea which one would be more fun to take out drinking.

This one>

Jenna looks so hot with her tongue hanging out that Canada probably censored the image.

I'd hit it. I won't lie.

angaq0k · Jul 21, 2004, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:

Jenna looks so hot with her tongue hanging out that Canada probably censored the image.

I'd hit it. I won't lie.

Well, we could introduce you to Pamela our spy coming in from the cold...

She's our Woman of Mass Distraction...

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Jul 21, 2004, 08:27 PM

Originally posted by angaq0k:
Actually, probabilities are that so far, with time, chances of finding WMDs get lower...

Keep hoping. In a nation the size of California, I don't see how you figure that. I could hide a fleet of mothballed B-52s in the California desert and if you didn't know exactly where they were, it'd take you years to find them.

How do I know for sure? Because there IS all sorts of ****, including a fleet of mothballed B-52s in the Cali desert that you'd never find if I didn't tell you exactly where to look.

angaq0k · Jul 21, 2004, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Keep hoping. In a nation the size of California, I don't see how you figure that. I could hide a fleet of mothballed B-52s in the California desert and if you didn't know exactly where they were, it'd take you years to find them.

How do I know for sure? Because there IS all sorts of ****, including a fleet of mothballed B-52s in the Cali desert that you'd never find if I didn't tell you exactly where to look.

Are you really, really really sure?

I am surprised that the famous US surveillance satellites that recognizes license plates from orbit can't find something that is about a few thousand times bigger in area.

Well, I guess US technology is not that advanced...

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Jul 21, 2004, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by angaq0k:
Well, I guess US technology is not that advanced...

Well I guess you thought it was all Star Trek, �Take a tricorder reading and beam up the WMDs Scotty!" but unfortunately it isn't.

First of all, even with the most sophisticated satellite you still have to have some idea where to look. I've read about the cat and mouse game of finding things like hidden missile sites even when you have a highly suspect region to search. The experts who find things on sat images that other people actually DON�T WANT FOUND (yeah, I know, it�s hard for a leftist to envision) know to look for telltale signs like access roads that don't seem to serve a logical purpose, ventilation evidence of underground facilities, etc. It's not just 'scan the whole world' and voila! You find everything hidden everywhere! The process is hardly automatic as perhaps you�ve been led to believe, and 9 times out of 10 even when something suspect looking is found �like a suspect access road or facility, or even burial site- it�s still not cut and dry what may be there simply from a sat image.

Actual ground confirmation needs to be established, and like most things, that takes TIME. (You know, that thing that actually passes by in reality while leftists sit on their duffs, complain, and expect everything handed to them instantly?)

And I'm sure it would never occur to you that it's HIGHLY doubtful that any contraband WMDs hidden in Iraq (whoops, would they actually try to hide them? No way!) are just sitting out in the open on flatbed trucks waiting to be found!

Heck, let's just hire you to find the Lost Dutchman mine, the location of any as-yet undiscovered ancient tombs, every lost treasure or hidden artifact in the entire world etc. etc. etc. I guess the leftie conspiracy Star Trek crew has it all figured out. Nothing will go missing on this planet ever again!

Since a satellite in your world can probably reveal the contents of the basement of my house, maybe I can call up NASA and have them fire up the new Tractor Beam-5000 and find a few things for me that I've misplaced down there over the years?

BRussell · Jul 21, 2004, 09:32 PM

Crash - Bush and Powell and everyone else in the administration have been saying for months that there aren't any WMDs. They're not even saying what you're saying now, that we'll find them eventually.

Spliffdaddy · 10:04 PM

*ahem*

sorry to interrupt your little discussion, but I found some enlightening news about everyone's sweetheart, Jenna Bush. This is from pigdog.org - no doubt owned by Zimphire, LLC.

"Jenna's first make-out session with a girl came at a high school senior party last year in Texas, a fellow student told The ENQUIRER.

"We were all pretty drunk and the guys kept egging Jenna on to make out with her good friend," the paper quotes the student as saying. "The two of them sat on a couch and began to kiss. The guys were cheering. But as I watched them, they really got into it.

"They were tongue-kissing and it went on for quite a while."

full text> http://www.pigdog.org/auto/Bush_Fami...link/2195.html

omg. now I want to hit it even more than I did before. You can keep "marry me" Britney and that prudish Hillary Duff - I'll be out at the bar with Jenna.

Vote for Dubya. So I can see more Jenna pics.

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Jul 21, 2004, 10:12 PM

Originally posted by BRussell:
Crash - Bush and Powell and everyone else in the administration have been saying for months that there aren't any WMDs. They're not even saying what you're saying now, that we'll find them eventually.

First of all, show me where they�ve said for certain that there are no WMDs in Iraq. No one has made any such statement, because no one could possibly know for certain at this stage.

You seem to ascribe magic powers to the President and his administration.

Again, WHERE is all this magic coming from? Can we harness it to solve all the other mysteries of the world? Why doesn�t someone get on this!?? Ask Bush where that Lost Dutchman mine is, and let�s clear up that Noah�s Ark thing on Mt. Ararat already! Bush or Powell should be able to divine exactly what�s there- and heck, we already know the basic location in question! With the level of psychic powers you�re ascribing to them, that kind of simple task should be all in an afternoon�s tea leaves.

The fact is: Bush, Powell, you, me, everyone posting here, everyone else- none of us knows for certain everything that may or may not be found from a 30+ year regime in a country the size and scale of Iraq.

It�s just foolish for anyone to pretend they could know with absolute certainty.

You haven�t got any more of a clue one way or another for certain, any more than any other person on the planet save Saddam Hussein. Last I heard he�s probably not saying much.

BRussell · Jul 21, 2004, 11:03 PM

You make it sound like it's some kind of metaphysical question that can never be fully answered. But in the real world, they've done the searches extremely intensively and they would have found them if they were there. Sure, anything's possible, but even the administration dropped that line several months ago.

Their point man on the WMDs said:

Kay told the senators that the intelligence he had seen before the war indicated Saddam had banned weapons and that France and Germany -- countries that had opposed the war -- had stated that the Iraqi dictator possessed such weapons.

"It turns out we were all wrong, and that is most disturbing," Kay said.

Kay said that while it was "theoretically possible" large stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons could be found in Iraq, the prospect was "highly unlikely."

And Bush said this.

Russert:_ The night you took the country to war, March 17th, you said this:_ "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

President Bush: Right.

Russert:_ That apparently is not the case.

President Bush: Correct.

Large parts of that Meet the Press interview include Bush essentially saying they thought the intelligence was right but he made the best decision with the information he had at the time. In other words, they were wrong. The whole premise of this "intelligence failure" line that they're using now is that they were wrong about the WMDs. If they weren't wrong, what was the failure?

Invictus · 11:42 PM

Originally posted by PacHead:
And this is from a guy who manages to tell two lies in the very same sentence. Take your ad-hominem garbage and peddle it somewhere else. There's plenty of other forums on the net that will welcome such simplistic debating techniques that you employ.

No

Originally posted by PacHead:
How about you discuss the topic at hand instead of me.

No you.

Originally posted by PacHead:
I suggest you make your own "I love PacHead" forum and moderate it.

Sorry, you're not my type. <edit> your/you're <edit>

P.S.

Spliffdaddy · Jul 21, 2004, 11:32 PM

you're not 'your'

Invictus · Jul 21, 2004, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
you're not 'your'

Damn! I always get caught on that. I'll try and do better. I know i can do it. Thanx Spliff.

PacHead · Jul 21, 2004, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by Invictus:
No you.

No, actually you.

I do discuss the topics at hand here.

In this thread, I replied to the topic, which was the possible find of WMD in Iraq. I also stated, that we will have to wait to see how this pans out. Your post in this thread was a 100% ad hominem attack on me, trying to discredit my person and thus my opinions on the matter. You don't see me following you around from thread to thread throwing dirt at you, and trying to discredit you.

You may not like my viewpoints or my political stance, that is fairly evident, but if you keep taking cheap swipes at me and using ad-hominen attacks in each of your replies to me, then I will report you. The last guy who did not take my warnings seriously got banished from here, after I asked that person a few times to cut it out.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=220224

I'm here to discuss politics, not to play games, and take insults from childish people. I may mock the lefties, and liberals and terrorists or whatever here, but I try not to get personal against any one member, even if I don't agree with their viewpoints or politics.

Invictus · 01:22 AM

Originally posted by PacHead:
I'm here to discuss politics, not to play games, and take insults from childish people. I may mock the lefties, and liberals and terrorists or whatever here, but I try not to get personal against any one member, even if I don't agree with their viewpoints or politics.

Leave Canada alone.

Your constant attacks on Canada because you consistently get 'smackdowned' by a Canadian in this forum is really petty.

And don't be so whiny...you're and embarrassment to the Republican Party.

<edit> On topic: Still no linky?

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Jul 22, 2004, 01:21 AM

Originally posted by BRussell:
[B]You make it sound like it's some kind of metaphysical question that can never be fully answered. But in the real world, they've done the searches extremely intensively and they would have found them if they were there. Sure, anything's possible, but even the administration dropped that line several months ago.

Both of those are pretty weak examples of your original claim. Neither is a conclusive statement, and neither person is magically endowed to know for absolute certainty.

You're dead wrong about 'they would have found them if they were there'. If there were WHERE? In known locations?? Tell me Sherlock, WHAT is the logic that someone seeking to HIDE something would choose a location where you as an investigator would KNOW to look? There are countless places in the country where they could have hidden anything. That's the whole point of HIDING something. This is something even a 4 year old can seem to grasp, yet somehow the concept is beyond the grasp of leftists!

You (and others) make it out to be as a simple either/or that can say conclusively what a 30+ year regime did in an area the size of California, when in the true scale of things almost NONE of it has actually been searched. For starters, there are vast underground tunnel networks that haven�t begun to be searched yet- we simply haven�t had the time/money/manpower. I've watched several reports where military units didn't even have the most basic equipment/manpower/expertise to get into tunnel complexes they had no idea the size/scale and contents of, and that such was actually a TYPICAL situation. Your �extremely intensively� rhetoric is just pure myth even in KNOWN locations, let alone as yet undiscovered ones.

I�d wager that if there�s anything to find it�ll probably be found practically by accident when the new government is poking around somewhere in some tract of what is now its own territory it can use for its own purposes. Evidence of crimes many times turn up by sheer accident, rather than as the result of organized searches.

The truth is, it�s possible anything could be hidden anywhere in Iraq. You seem to be operating on this weird Star Trek-esque belief that some sort of technology exists that allows any of us, even leaders of nations, to be all-knowing. Stop watching so much TV- there is no such thing.

I don�t know what is or isn�t hidden virtually anywhere in Iraq, and NEITHER do you. The difference between us is: you just like to pretend you do know for sure.

One thing is for certain, if anything is ever is found conclusively, I�ll look for people like you that have invested so much effort in pretending you know for sure something that�s impossible for you to know for sure, to be spinning like a top over it! Guaranteed! I�d wager good money on it.

PacHead · Jul 22, 2004, 01:29 AM

Originally posted by Invictus:
Leave Canada alone.

Your constant attacks on Canada because you consistently get 'smackdowned' by a Canadian in this forum is really petty.

And don't be so whiny...you're and embarrassment to the Republican Party.

<edit> On topic: Still no linky?

I'll say whatever I please about Canada or any other country for that matter. And just for the record, I am not a member of any political party, so once again your assumptions are wrong.

BRussell · Jul 22, 2004, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
I don�t know what is or isn�t hidden virtually anywhere in Iraq, and NEITHER do you. The difference between us is: you just like to pretend you do know for sure.

One thing is for certain, if anything is ever is found conclusively, I�ll look for people like you that have invested so much effort in pretending you know for sure something that�s impossible for you to know for sure, to be spinning like a top over it! Guaranteed! I�d wager good money on it.

This isn't me saying this, this is the administration. I haven't been giving my opinion on WMDs at all, I just said what the administration has been saying, that their intelligence on Iraq having WMDs was wrong. I'm sure they would acknowledge that something might still be found, but 1) at some point, one must admit that it's "extremely unlikely," as David Kay, the administration's main WMD finder has said, and 2) there's a difference between finding a vial buried in some yard somewhere, and having stockpiles of WMDs ready to be fired, as was claimed.

dialo · Jul 22, 2004, 10:11 AM

The funny part of this is that some of you guys still don't realize why he called the report flat out "stupid" and why that description extends to anyone who would believe it.

Invictus · Jul 22, 2004, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by PacHead:
I'll say whatever I please about Canada or any other country for that matter. And just for the record, I am not a member of any political party, so once again your assumptions are wrong.

And I will reply to your posts at my pleasure. Your harassment of me will not change anything. This harassment only shows your weak knowledge of anything and leads to these attacks on me and others who don't hold your bizarre beliefs.

Your antics have caused many a derailed thread imploding into bickering. This thread notwithstanding. Not that it matters in this case because this thread is hogwash mixed with bullcrappy.

zigzag · Jul 22, 2004, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by BRussell:
This isn't me saying this, this is the administration. I haven't been giving my opinion on WMDs at all, I just said what the administration has been saying, that their intelligence on Iraq having WMDs was wrong. I'm sure they would acknowledge that something might still be found, but 1) at some point, one must admit that it's "extremely unlikely," as David Kay, the administration's main WMD finder has said, and 2) there's a difference between finding a vial buried in some yard somewhere, and having stockpiles of WMDs ready to be fired, as was claimed.

Kay has used stronger words than that - he said that anyone who thinks caches of WMDs will be found is "delusional."

I agree with CRASH that nothing is certain. So I wish he would take his own advice and stop telling us that "chances are great that eventually WMD evidence in Iraq will be found." But it seems to give him another excuse to rant about lefties, even thought the lefties have thus far been even more correct than they themselves anticipated.