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

Skip to comments.

Iraq 'will have nuclear bomb in months'
drudge report | today | By Katty Kay in Washington, Paul Martin and Melissa Kite

Posted on 09/15/2002 6:56:20 PM PDT by TheRedSoxWinThePennant

Iraq 'will have nuclear bomb in months'
By Katty Kay in Washington, Paul Martin and Melissa Kite

Bush security chief tells of Saddam links with al-Qaeda

IRAQ could produce nuclear weapons within months using pirated German equipment and uranium smuggled from Brazil, according to a dissident Iraqi nuclear scientist.


The revelations painting an alarming picture of President Saddam Hussein’s nuclear capabilities came as the White House made its strongest link yet between Saddam and al-Qaeda, and demanded a United Nations resolution as soon as this week.

Dr Khidir Hamza, who was science adviser to the Atomic Energy Establishment and later helped to start and direct Iraq’s nuclear bomb programme before he defected in 1994, claims in an interview with The Times today that Saddam could be in a position to make three nuclear weapons within the next few months, if he has not already done so.

Dr Hamza gave warning that UN inspectors would be useless because even if they were given “unfettered access” they would find it far more difficult than before to detect the nuclear assembly line. “The beauty of the present system is that the units are each very small and in the four years since the inspectors left they will have been concealed underground or in basements or buildings that outwardly seem normal,” Dr Hamza said.

Dr Hamza gave evidence before Senator Joe Biden’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on Iraq in Washington last August but it was only after the recent International Institute for Strategic Studies report on the threat from Saddam that he became aware of the West’s imperfect understanding of the urgency of the situation.

Dr Hamza’s new estimation of the speed with which a nuclear bomb could be produced is centred on the number of pirated centrifuges that Baghdad has been able to produce and the rapidity with which the re-processing programme is being undertaken. The scientist’s intelligence suggests a more immediate threat than reported last week by the IISS, which concluded that Iraq could make a bomb only if it smuggled in the necessary uranium or radioactive material.

According to Dr Hamza, that material is already inside Iraq and is currently being processed to weapons grade. He said that Iraq was using a centrifuge method to get a bomb which is easier and quicker than other methods. “Unless he’s stopped soon, Saddam will have set up a whole nuclear bomb industry, not just have made a couple of bombs,” Dr Hamza said.

The Bush Administration yesterday made its strongest public connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda. National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, said that al-Qaeda personnel had been spotted in Baghdad and that the Iraqi regime had ties to the network.

Until now the Administration has shied away from linking Iraq to al-Qaeda, prompting widespread speculation that the US had no evidence of links between the two. Yesterday Dr Rice suggested that was not the case: “Iraq has clearly links with terrorism that would include al-Qaeda.”

Dr Rice backed away from any implication that Saddam was involved in the September 11 attacks, but said that there was sufficient evidence against him to justify action without ties to the attacks on New York and Washington. “Let’s be clear. There’s plenty to indict Saddam Hussein without a direct link to 9/11,” she said.

There were growing signs that the international community was moving in America’s favour to support an urgent UN deadline for Iraq to readmit weapons inspectors. Washington maintained pressure on the international community to move fast and start work on resolutions in the next few days. “I expect we’d work on a resolution in fairly short order, in the next week,” Dr Rice said.

In a key strategic victory for the US, Saudi Arabia said yestrday that if America had UN authority, it would be allowed to use bases in the desert kingdom for an attack against Iraq.

Jack Straw, at the UN General Assembly, said there was a growing consensus about the nature of the demands to be imposed on the Iraqi regime. The Foreign Secretary said that the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — the US, Britain, France, China and Russia — had not yet made a final decision about whether there would be one resolution or two.

As diplomats discussed their options for Baghdad, US and British jets bombed an air defence communications facility near Tallil, 160 miles (257km) south of Baghdad. There were no reports of casualties.


TOPICS: Extended News
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last
what are we waiting for lets give him a 100 megaton one right now
1 posted on 09/15/2002 6:56:20 PM PDT by TheRedSoxWinThePennant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
If he ever got one and used it, all the people saying there's no evidence he's got one will then say we caused him to use it.
2 posted on 09/15/2002 7:01:28 PM PDT by lasereye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
Now,now, let's not go off half cocked like Tom Dasshole.
We need the voice of reason now more than ever, where is jimmy carter when you need him?
You don't see Hillery! beating her war drums do you?
Yes I now it's like thunder when she walks but that doesn't count.
I'm sure we haven't heard the last of Bill Clinton on this
either.
"Naah, I could have stopped him, we knew he was building all this stuff, but that dang Republican judiciary comittee just
kept my mind off the real danger to our great repository of
democrat donations, er I mean the US."
3 posted on 09/15/2002 7:02:10 PM PDT by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lasereye
If we don't take him out, those same people will be saying that the Bush Administration had ample warning and chose not to do anything, probably to protect Halliburton contracts or something.
4 posted on 09/15/2002 7:03:48 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
The problem is that once he gets it, we wont go near him. No one is going to send 100,000 troops against a nuke.

At the first sign of an attack, he will unleash it on Turkey or Tel Aviv, prompting such massive retaliation that no sane person would think of starting with him.

It becomes the ultimate sword of Damacles.
5 posted on 09/15/2002 7:06:09 PM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
It's okay. We have nothing to worry about. Tom Dasshole assured us of this.
6 posted on 09/15/2002 7:06:57 PM PDT by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
Let's cut to the chase. they probably already have these weapons. Why should I shut up when I'm in the target zone?

Sure I was shocked by the attack on the towers. What's next?

7 posted on 09/15/2002 7:11:53 PM PDT by Concentrate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
That UN is one darn useful organization, I tell you. He has or is about to have a nuclear weapon. What do we do? Wring hands. Wait, I know! We'll pass a resolution and tell him he has to play nice! Yeah, that'll do it! And on the off-chance it doesn't, by golly we'll meet again in a few months or a year or so, and we'll pass ANOTHER resolution! That'll do it for SURE!

Amazing that such a mindset could actually exist but it is indeed the standard MO for much of the world.

MM

8 posted on 09/15/2002 7:23:59 PM PDT by MississippiMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MississippiMan
Sadaam can take Donahue's show and he'd have a bomb tomorrow.
9 posted on 09/15/2002 7:25:54 PM PDT by jraven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
I'm sure this will be in the NY Times tomorrow...page A38.
10 posted on 09/15/2002 7:29:40 PM PDT by PianoMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jraven
You are funny.
11 posted on 09/15/2002 7:32:55 PM PDT by Rocko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: tomahawk
It's okay. We have nothing to worry about. Tom Dasshole assured us of this.

And Graham of Florida said he's more concerned with Iran, so let's not get so excited over Iraq.

12 posted on 09/15/2002 7:36:45 PM PDT by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jraven
LOL
13 posted on 09/15/2002 7:56:14 PM PDT by PianoMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2; Big Steve; deport; blackie; Deb; Salvation; Howlin; Wait4Truth; ...
Thanks for the post.When you combined this article based on the Times of London and the London Telegraph - it's truly frightening!
14 posted on 09/15/2002 8:06:51 PM PDT by Lady In Blue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
Until now the Administration has shied away from linking Iraq to al-Qaeda, prompting widespread speculation that the US had no evidence of links between the two. Yesterday Dr Rice suggested that was not the case: “Iraq has clearly links with terrorism that would include al-Qaeda.”

I have always thought it was a little ridiculous for some of the keyboard warriors around here to be claiming that "there's no link between Iraq and Al Queda" based on what they "seen on TV."

Unless, of course, they have a top secret security clearance that chose for some reason not to reveal...

15 posted on 09/15/2002 8:47:45 PM PDT by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redsoxallthewayintwothousand2
Could this be why other arab countries, like Saudi seem to be changing their minds & coming on board with us? They all know that a nuke in the Madmans hands is death for all of them!
16 posted on 09/15/2002 9:01:50 PM PDT by blondee123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt
It's going to be difficult if he has some nukes, no doubt about that. If he is producing them everywhere like a cottage industry there is no telling where they will turn up. Maybe he has 3 transport methods, missile, truck, and boat; stopping all that would be a problem. If he starts detonating them, how can he be stopped short of blasting everything inside Iraq? What a huge project that would be.
17 posted on 09/15/2002 9:04:51 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Concentrate
After 9-11, waking up to a nuke going off in New York, or DC, doesn't seem so farfetched.
18 posted on 09/15/2002 9:11:52 PM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
The UN should be notified of the plan for saturation bombing of Bagdad...The morning after.
19 posted on 09/15/2002 9:35:07 PM PDT by sleavelessinseattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sleavelessinseattle
Let the UN be notified of any heavy bombing the same way we will be notified. That is watching the cities of Iraq light up the night in Iraq. That is after our stealth bombers light up the Iraqi cities.

Notifiying the UN would be like telling Da$$hole or Leaky Leahy ahead of time that we planned to bomb on X date. They would phone Saddam as demand their last payments asap. What payments, the payments for delaying the US from taking out Saddam.
20 posted on 09/15/2002 10:46:28 PM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


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