Re: And I rest my case...

Post #106,327 by johnu 6/17/03 12:38:51 PM Reply	Re: And I rest my case... [link\|http://www.efreedomnews.com/News%20Archive/Iraq/Saddam%20Nuke.htm\|Saddam's Bomb Maker: Iraq Working on 'Hiroshima Size' Nuke (2/19/2002)] Citing U.S. intelligence estimates, Dr. Khidir Hamza told nationally syndicated radio taker Sean Hannity, "I don't think he has [nuclear weapons] right now but it may not take long for him to have it - a year or two probably." "U.S. intelligence estimates at least a year. Germany estimates by 2005, three nuclear weapons," the top Iraqi nuke scientist said. Dr. Hamza, who defected to the U.S. in 1994, warned about Hussein's nuclear weapons program in his autobiography, "Saddam's Bombmaker," three years ago. More recently he has been working closely with U.S. intelligence agencies. ... German intelligence now believes Hussein once again has all the bombmaking materials he needs except for the enriched uranium necessary for the nuclear core. "According to the Germans he, more or less, has 30 to 35 percent of the technology needed to enrich uranium for bomb grade," said Hamza, adding, "so he will have enough uranium, and he already has a stockpile of uranium to use." The top Iraqi nuke scientist said that, based on what he witnessed, Hussein is working on "Hiroshima size" weapons of "12 to 20 kilotons." But he cautioned: "There was some enhancement to the bomb that could raise it to 40 kilotons. So you are looking at [a] realistic nuclear weapons stockpile equivalent to that of, say, at least India and Pakistan - and if it continues, probably larger." Do you argue that Iraq did not have the capability to produce a nuclear weapon sometime in the next 5 years? If not, do you argue that Sadaam in possession of a nuke is not a serious threat to the US? Regards, John
Post #106,336 by Simon_Jester 6/17/03 1:51:08 PM Reply	Come back with some real evidence... Do you argue that Iraq did not have the capability to produce a nuclear weapon sometime in the next 5 years? Certainly not. I'm stating that the evidence produced so far to indicate that Iraq was attempting to produce nuclear weapons has been fabricated. Furthermore, I'm stating that I believe our administration was intent not on discovering whether or not Saddam/Iraq were intent on producing nuclear weapons but rather that they were intent on stating that Saddam/Iraq were intent on producing nuclear weapons to justify a military action. Furthermore, if you read my link - you'd see my evidence for such a statement. (Niger uranium, aluminum tubes, etc.) Finally - ask Dr. Hamza how long it would take a country - any country - to develop nuclear weapons given the resources. (Hint: we did it - the first one ever, from scratch - in less than 5 years.) If not, do you argue that Sadaam in possession of a nuke is not a serious threat to the US? Absolutely - but then I didn't claim that Saddam was in, or attempting to be in, possession of a nuclear weapon. Someone else claimed that we were in danger of finding out via a mushroom cloud. Blah - I've said (repeatedly now) that Bush wanted to go in and made stuff up to do it. I've given my examples. All you've come up with a Scientist that says Saddam didn't have the weapons but might be able to in a couple of years. Come back with some real evidence.
Post #209,515 by Simon_Jester 6/2/05 3:36:44 AM Reply	Nearly two years later.... Blah - I've said (repeatedly now) that Bush wanted to go in and made stuff up to do it. I've given my examples. All you've come up with a Scientist that says Saddam didn't have the weapons but might be able to in a couple of years. Come back with some real evidence. and we have the [link\|http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/memo.html\|Downing Street Memo]... The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force. The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change.
Post #209,571 by tuberculosis 6/2/05 11:21:34 AM 8/21/07 5:56:50 AM Reply	Yep - but lets start a new thread about Downing Street Memos (new thread) Created as new thread #209570 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=209570\|Yep - but lets start a new thread about Downing Street Memos] "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush Edited by tuberculosis Aug. 21, 2007, 05:56:50 AM EDT Expand All History

Welcome to IWETHEY!