Saddam Has Tested Nuclear Weapons and is ready to use them!

Atour: The State of Assyria ^ | 1Q 2001 | Editorial Staff

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

That's correct, we (and other countries) have seismic equipment that are capable of detecting nuclear detonations anywhere in the world. Even if the CIA/FBI/U.S. Govt wanted to keep an Iraqi nuclear detonation secret, another country could've and would've spilled the beans. Pakistan couldn't keep it a secret and Iraq couldn't either.

[Rain-maker]

They tested a dud!

Do not pass go, do not collect drakmas...

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

"If he did have the bomb before the Gulf War then why didnt he use it during the Gulf War?? "

Lack of a reliable, long range delivery system?

Scud was first deployed by the Soviets in the mid-1960s. The missile was originally designed to carry a 100-kiloton nuclear warhead or a 2,000 pound conventional warhead, with ranges from 100 to 180 miles. Its principal threat was its warhead potential to hold chemical or biological agents.

It is directly descended from the German V-2. Its warhead is permanently attached to the missile body and thus has a high velocity impact. The first combat use of the Scud occurred in 1973 in the Arab-Israeli Yom Kippur War. It was later used in the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s.

"The Iraqis modified Scuds for greater range, largely by reducing warhead weight, enlarging their fuel tanks and burning all of the fuel during the early phase of flight (rather than continuously). Such a Scud therefore came down with a relatively heavy warhead and a heavy motor, separated by the light empty fuel tank. It was structurally unstable and often broke up in the upper atmosphere. That further reduced its already poor accuracy, but it also made the missile difficult to intercept, since its flight path was unpredictable.

The Iraqis had four versions: Scud itself (180-km range), longer-range Scud (half warhead weight, extra range attained by burning all propellant immediately rather than steadily through the flight of the missile), Al Hussein (650-km, attained by reducing warhead weight to 250 kg and increasing the fuel load by 15 percent), and Al Abbas (800-km, achieved by reducing warhead weight to 125 kg, with 30 percent more fuel). Al Abbas could be fired only from static launchers; all of the others could be fired from mobile or static sites. Only the original Scud and the minimally modified version were particularly succesful."

From: "Desert Victory - The War for Kuwait" by Norman Friedman, Naval Institute Press, 1991:

[Paulus Invictus]

But are we willing to have them take out one of our large cities first, say D.C.? Or what about Jerusalem? Riyadh? Or Rome? Or London? Or Berlin? How would we respond in each of those cases? No question how Israel would respond if attacked or even if credibly threatened.

My fear is that the Iraqi morons don't care if we respond to an atomic attack with max force. I am sure the Israelis know if there had been an atomic underground test, but I do worry that the Felon may have compromised our own ability to detect such bombs. After all, it was his Secy of State, the miserable, dimbulb Albright that proclaimed that "everyone" had a right to atomic secrets, just to make it even.

[Jhoffa_]

I find this suspect.

If we knew Iraq tested a NW prior to the Gulf War, then:

A) Why not mention it.. ?

B) Why leave Saddam in power?

C) why wasn't it implemented during the (rofl) "Mother Of ALL Wars!"

And, of course we WOULD know if Saddam tested a NW.

If we didn't, we would quickly find out.

[Jhoffa_]

They tested a dud!

Now that, imvho.. is a very real possibility.

[Jhoffa_]

PS: to #26.

It would also be consistant with what the Administration has been telling us.

"Saddam is trying to develop weapons of mass destruction"

[Grut]

A typical passage:

Could it be a hoax? "If it were, Leone would use a more standard design, not invent an unusual one," replied Barnaby.

Relax. This is written with the sort of specious logic and 'terrific' style typical of UFO books and it's about as believable.

[Grut]

Also, note the date - last February.

[tet68]

Not as frightening as people who would buy this.

"They washed out the shaft with water to remove any radioactivity.

Give me a break!

[ThirdMate]

bump

[soterios]

One thing that i have read on this subject is that Iraq did indeed have a nuclear bomb before the Gulf War. However it is believed that Saddam tried to let us build our forces up and then he was going to 'nuke' our troops. That is why he didnt do anything for so long as our troops started to deploy. But before he could hit our troops one of our planes bombed the bomb so it couldnt be used against us. One of the recent defectors say that he once again has a small number of nuclear weapons...is it true...i dunno. But i think it is a possibility

[Publius6961]

Can you say disinformation?
Muslims are masters at it.
There is repeated mention of the fact that the information is not the type found in libraries, yet everything described is exactly that.

And the reporter... what is his "BS meter" level in terms of technical knowledge in order to know he is being snowed?

What exactly does "the entrance was destroyed" mean?
In the real world, no such thing is possible.
Concrete plugs? That size is easily located by seismic survey; there is no way to keep that hidden long.

This whole story smells suspiciously like "the mother of all battles"... all bluster, posturing and "let them worry about this"...

[DBrow]

Saddam may have a bomb but this guy knows nothing of it!

A gun type bomb "without fuel" is, like, a cannon barrel.

Washing the radioactivity out of the cavern made when a nuke goes off? He thinks that six guys in raincoats with a couple firehoses can just tunnel into the hot spot and flush the residue? And if you could, where would you flush it to? Look at what we used to do to conduct a UGT, then look at what he describes. Perhaps a fizzle, that you could go in with tweezers and pick up the pieces of U235 and wash the rest, but once you burn a pit and get some yield you are talking some serious rads in there.

A gun type bomb, while "simple" compared to an implosion bomb, still is pretty complex and has lots of engineering issues with timing and strength of materials. Making a gun type with more than one moving slug means that each moving piece must meet at exactly the correct time or no bomb.

The whole tone is wrong. They will kill me and my family if I talk, but for you I will babble for hours and draw pictures.

An amusing article but I'm not losing any (more) sleep because of it.