Skip to comments.
Shocker: New York Times Confirms Iraqi Nuclear Weapons Program
NRO ^
| Jim Geraghty
Posted on 11/02/2006 8:09:04 PM PST by hipaatwo
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 401-402 next last
To: hipaatwo
To: hipaatwo
My take:
http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com/
However, it begs a question - if Saddam's scientists were that close, and those documents were preserved, and they knew what they needed to do to reconstitute the program, and they had the yellowcake (under seals that can be broken, just like Iran did), and they had the money (via the oil-for-bribes scheme) - wouldn't Iraq today be not much different from Iran and North Korea, in posing immediate dangers of acquiring nuclear weapons?
Yes, they would. We don't have a timetable, we don't know when the 'verge of' would have translated into a reality, we just know that it would have happened sooner or later.
102
posted on
11/02/2006 8:42:13 PM PST
by
WOSG
(Broken-glass time, Republicans! Save the Congress!)
To: syriacus
As I posted on another thread a few minutes ago, this is opening a door for pointing out the WMD program by Iraq, now proved on the front page of the NYT. The information on the web site came from, among other sources, a hippie generation book that told how to build a bomb. The information and a dollar will get you ... a cup of coffee. It is the processing of the materials, changing atoms, that really counts. Every country on Earth knows HOW to make a nuke.
103
posted on
11/02/2006 8:42:34 PM PST
by
gb63
To: LikeLight
Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Husseins scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.
It's blatantly obvious to me from context, and also from the context of the entire article, that when they say "on the verge" they mean before Gulf War I, not 2002. It's that one of the reports that the Iraqis made about the 1991 program was from 2002.
However, I've had little succces previously on FR from keeping people from living in hopeful fantasyworlds, and I don't think I'm going to have much success in this one either.
104
posted on
11/02/2006 8:43:22 PM PST
by
Strategerist
(Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves)
To: blake6900
IT`s this elections DWI story but it will backfire cause it adds to the justifications for the war. It also attracts needed attention to all the other documents we captured. The only bad thing is it might take SEN.Carry off the front pages.
105
posted on
11/02/2006 8:43:25 PM PST
by
bybybill
(`IF TH E RATS WIN, WE LOSE)
To: hipaatwo
This same newspaper exposed the top secret details of our program to monitor Al-Qaeda's banking transactions. Their assertion was that exposing the program didn't help one terrorists in any way.
This same newspaper exposed the details of top secret Al-Qaeda detention facilities. Their assertion was that exposing the program didn't help the terrorists in any way.
This same newspaper treated the president of Iran like a rock star, asserting that his nuclear ambitions were peaceful and/or defensive, and that he did not pose a danger to the United States in any way.
NOW it turns out that the United States exposed the details of Saddam's top secret nuclear program and this newpaper's assertion is that this will provide tremendous aid and comfort to the enemies of America.
To: Strategerist
Bottom line: "Bush lied" is out the window! Try rebutting that.
To: hipaatwo
...contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that the nuclear experts say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums...yeah, like Iran went to the internet and "other public forums" for info on how to build nuclear weapons - we're in big trouble if this is the level of sophistication of our "nuclear experts"......
To: Strategerist
They're reports BY the Iraqis TO the international inspectors, the Iraqis doing what they were required to do, summarizing the nuclear research they did PRIOR to the 1991 Gulf War.If they're just summaries, then how could posting them on the internet possibly be dangerous? The NYT can't have it both ways. And why is the IAEI is so worried about them being posted, if they're just "summaries"?
To: REDWOOD99
Bottom line: "Bush lied" is out the window! Try rebutting that.
You haven't understood a single line of the NYT story or a single reply I've made on this thread, have you?
110
posted on
11/02/2006 8:45:12 PM PST
by
Strategerist
(Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves)
To: hipaatwo
And the lie "No War for Oil" is overtaken by the fact that we never stole Iraq's oil. Don't expect the NYT to ever admit that or the Left-wing cranks that said that about Bush or big oil.
111
posted on
11/02/2006 8:45:48 PM PST
by
elhombrelibre
(Global Warming Fears will do for the world what over population fears did for Europe.)
To: LikeLight
They are apparently pretty detailed summaries with diagrams.
112
posted on
11/02/2006 8:45:52 PM PST
by
Strategerist
(Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves)
To: Strategerist
You are living in a little world of your own. But keep spinning. LOL
113
posted on
11/02/2006 8:46:01 PM PST
by
A Citizen Reporter
(Sign at World Series in St. Louis, October 27, 2006 "The Experts are Idiots")
To: Grampa Dave
114
posted on
11/02/2006 8:46:49 PM PST
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
To: FlingWingFlyer
"The way I read this is, "the incompetent Bush Administration" put documents on the internet telling people how to make a nuclear bomb."
That's what the slimes is trying to say ... but what they are REALLY admitting is that there are documents that show
Saddam Hussein and his minions knew how to make a nuclear bomb, or were a good part of the way there.
WHY WOULDN'T IRAQ THEMSELVES BE ONE OF THOSE DANGEROS STATES IF SADDAM WAS LEFT IN POWER?
"I think that's the point the slimes is trying to make. I don't think this is a good thing."
The people this info would have helped most is the Iraqis themselves...
NY Times:
"A senior American intelligence official who deals routinely with atomic issues said the documents showed where the Iraqis failed and how to get around the failures. The documents, he added, could perhaps help Iran or other nations making a serious effort to develop nuclear arms, but probably not terrorists or poorly equipped states. The official, who requested anonymity because of his agencys rules against public comment, called the papers a road map that helps you get from point A to point B, but only if you already have a car."
115
posted on
11/02/2006 8:46:56 PM PST
by
WOSG
(Broken-glass time, Republicans! Save the Congress!)
Comment #116 Removed by Moderator
To: technomage
Democrats' taunts inspire terrorist and encourage them to think we lack the resolve to finish the job.
117
posted on
11/02/2006 8:47:31 PM PST
by
elhombrelibre
(Global Warming Fears will do for the world what over population fears did for Europe.)
To: Strategerist
Thanks but we don't need your reading comprehension tips, or your haughty attitude.
118
posted on
11/02/2006 8:48:13 PM PST
by
A Citizen Reporter
(Sign at World Series in St. Louis, October 27, 2006 "The Experts are Idiots")
To: hipaatwo
Fellow freepers, I have only one simply succinct statement to make regarding this latest special development....
WOOOOOO - HOOOO!!!!
First Kerry, now the New York Times, my goodness what will the hat trick be?
119
posted on
11/02/2006 8:48:14 PM PST
by
rjp2005
(Lord have mercy on us)
To: Strategerist
I've been following your replies to various threads for quite a while. You are a troll.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 401-402 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson