The rockets are a violation of the agreements Iraq signed as well, even if we wanted to be charitable and pretend that's what they are for. The tolerances alone render the rocket argument wholly moot, and the Iraqis not only requested specific tolerances well beyond what you can afford to waste on rockets, they actually ordered even finer tolerances after finding the first inadeqate for their needs. There are no rockets that require such fine toolerances, nor olympic bicycles, as someone else desperately suggested. There is no need whatsoever for rocket tubes to be milled smoother than glass INSIDE and out, and no one would go to the expense to do it. Not to mention that "rockets" don't need to be resistant to the corrosives used in uranium enrichment.
Good grief. Think- near perfect milling INSIDE the tubes? What on earth for?
As some Iraqi might say : "And the extra money paid to make sure they can withstand corrosives is wonderful- I mean, what would people say if we unboxed a rocket and spilled corrosive on it from our nuclear "university research" facility, and it got stained before we launched it a few minutes later, and then when it hit and blew apart some Americans as designed--- what if the UN sees that we used cheaper, common aluminum plate materials that couldn't even hold up to a little mishandling by a nuclear scientist for years at a time instead of investing in the high grade stuff? I mean, we might hit someon important Kuwaiti. Can you imagine a rich Kuwaiti prince getting blown away by an inferior, common rocket? We might hit an American diplomat instead of some common people. They might sanction us again for insulting them with a blue light special...
No, only the best for us!"
We could make so many more rockets if we just used the stuff everone else uses, but that would be SOOOO tacky. So we went out shopped way above our means. Just wait until you see our platinum bullets and gilded porcelain grenades!
- Hussein's hairdresser