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

Skip to comments.

SADDAM IN ALL-OUT NUKE BID: COLIN
New York Post | 5/06/02 | JOHN LEHMANN and VINCENT MORRIS

Posted on 05/06/2002 12:48:05 AM PDT by kattracks

May 6, 2002 -- Saddam Hussein is working "feverishly" to build a nuclear bomb but hasn't succeeded yet, Secretary of State Colin Powell said yesterday.

Powell spoke after a new report said Iraq's nuclear program was back in full swing as Saddam prepared his arsenal for a U.S. attack.

Charles Duelfer, who was the second-ranking official on the United Nation's Special Commission on Iraq, said Iraq's nuclear scientists were "gravitating" to the country's five nuclear-research sites.

"That doesn't appear to be coincidental," he told Time magazine.

Powell said he had no reason to believe that Saddam had obtained a sufficient supply of weapons-grade enriched uranium.

"I haven't noticed that he's made any breakthroughs, but I'm sure he's working feverishly," he told NBC's "Meet the Press."

"And that's why the United States, irrespective of what the United Nations might do with inspectors or sanctions, continues to believe that regime change is the best solution."

While the International Atomic Energy Agency dismantled 40 Iraqi nuclear-research facilities plants in the 1990s, Duelfer said U.N. inspectors were unable to account for Saddam's complete bank of chemical and biological weapons.

Prior to the Gulf War, Baghdad produced 8,400 liters of anthrax, 19,000 liters of botulinum and 2,000 liters each of aflatoxin and clostridium, the Iraqi government says.

A single gram of anthrax - about 1/30 of an ounce - is enough for 100 million fatal doses if properly dispersed.



TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

1 posted on 05/06/2002 12:48:05 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Won't be long now!
2 posted on 05/06/2002 12:51:46 AM PDT by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Bill Clinton, thanks for nothing. Mr.Sharon, thanks for nothing. Mr. Bush, go get him.[ Rush, shutup]
3 posted on 05/06/2002 12:53:08 AM PDT by bybybill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bybybill
GOOD THING THAT ISRAEL TOOK OUT THE IRAQI PLANT THAT HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN IT IN 1982, THANK GOD FOR ISRAEL
4 posted on 05/06/2002 12:58:30 AM PDT by spamtana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Prior to the Gulf War, Baghdad produced 8,400 liters of anthrax, 19,000 liters of botulinum and 2,000 liters each of aflatoxin and clostridium, the Iraqi government says.

A single gram of anthrax - about 1/30 of an ounce - is enough for 100 million fatal doses if properly dispersed.

Oh, dear.

5 posted on 05/06/2002 1:23:48 AM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
This is wonderful, let's kick back and light up a Cohiba.
6 posted on 05/06/2002 1:24:37 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spamtana
GOOD THING THAT ISRAEL TOOK OUT THE IRAQI PLANT THAT HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN IT IN 1982

Yeah, we may be ticked off at Israel for throwing off our plans to get Saddam, but their action in 1982 saved us big time. And by wiping out a lot of West Bank terror infrastructure, Israel has not only bought themselves some breathing space but may actually have done us a big service by securing our flank better when we go for Iraq.

7 posted on 05/06/2002 1:35:20 AM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
A single gram of anthrax - about 1/30 of an ounce - is enough for 100 million fatal doses if properly dispersed

"Properly dispersed" in a dream-world optimial dispersion that could never happen. But it still gives you a good idea of how deadly this stuff is, doesn't it?

8 posted on 05/06/2002 1:38:58 AM PDT by Quila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
"I haven't noticed that he's made any breakthroughs

LOL! Does he mean he's certain Saddam hasn't tested one yet, or that he doesn't fully trust the intelligence community to notice...?

9 posted on 05/06/2002 2:19:48 AM PDT by Lion's Cub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
I dont think so......propaganda to scare. Nope not workin' here.
10 posted on 05/06/2002 2:38:13 AM PDT by oceanperch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quila
What is the wind mph when a nuke goes off say like the ones we have tested out in the desert. Curious.
11 posted on 05/06/2002 2:41:30 AM PDT by oceanperch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch
What is the wind mph when a nuke goes off ...?

as in anthrax, etc. dispersal via a nuke blast ?
that seems counterintuitive.
wouldn't the radiation/heat fry the stuff ?

12 posted on 05/06/2002 2:48:15 AM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Gee.

Another "Saddam nuke" story.

Let's run the usual checklist?

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

published in newspaper not known for veracity : check

quotes obscure boffin whose career will be enhanced by fearmongering : check

includes absurd doomsday scenario :check

completely free of any documented independent facts : check

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

Soooo....what's up, with Brad and Jennifer?

13 posted on 05/06/2002 3:07:16 AM PDT by Byron_the_Aussie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch; tomkat
What is the wind mph when a nuke goes off say like the ones we have tested out in the desert. Curious.

Tomkat's right, the heat and radiation would kill the spores. Anyway, it's not speed that matters, but perfectly even dispersal over a perfectly even population.

I believe that casualty number is based on how much anthrax it takes to kill one person, which is a very minute amount. The problem is getting exactly that amout to that many people, which is impossible -- you get one person taking 1,000,000 times the lethal amount of spores (1/100th gram) and others getting nothing.

For a visual, let's say one small bag of flower contains anthrax capable of killing 10 billion people (100 grams). Crowd 1,000 people onto a football field, throw up the bag, and shoot it above them. Most people will get dust on them and inhale some (not counting wind, rain, etc.). Now do the same with the theoretical dosage needed to kill 1,000 people, which is 1/100,000 gram. Do you think more than one or two people will get hit?

I tossed my NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) school materials long ago, so don't quote me as an authoritative source. I'm just going on what I remember.

14 posted on 05/06/2002 3:22:44 AM PDT by Quila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
published in newspaper not known for veracity : check

What newspaper is?

15 posted on 05/06/2002 3:29:00 AM PDT by gr8eman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Quila
I don't know anything about this at all (at all) but I noticed the other day mention of a book called "Crudely dispersed aerosols". Presumably this is to do with rain and vapour and atmosphere, but it had me thinking: wouldn't meteorology be important?
16 posted on 05/06/2002 4:32:53 AM PDT by anatolfz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gr8eman
..what newspaper is?...

The Reykjavik Times.

When they say the cod are running, stop whatever you're doing, grab your rod and reel, and git down to the wharf.

17 posted on 05/06/2002 5:03:32 AM PDT by Byron_the_Aussie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Quila
For a visual, let's say one small bag of flower contains anthrax capable of killing 10 billion people (100 grams).

flower = flour......

interesting reading otherwise

:-)

18 posted on 05/06/2002 5:38:43 AM PDT by Jackie222
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
Saddam targets trouser trout as multiple cases of running cod are reported. Tom Ridge issues code yellow alert. Breaking hard.
19 posted on 05/06/2002 5:41:22 AM PDT by Hilltop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: spamtana
GOOD THING THAT ISRAEL TOOK OUT THE IRAQI PLANT THAT HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN IT IN 1982, THANK GOD FOR ISRAEL

AMEN!!!

20 posted on 05/06/2002 6:11:54 AM PDT by Thane_Banquo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

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