Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What happened to looted Iraqi nuclear material? --->>>

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:18 AM
Original message
What happened to looted Iraqi nuclear material? --->>>

It's time to revisit this article from 2003. A sub-discussion in this thread brought up the old question - if the Bush administration's claims about Iraqi nuclear activities were true, WHY didn't the U.S. secure Iraq's known nuclear sites immediately upon occupying the country? They did not. They only guarded the Oil Ministry.

Just another SMOKING GUN in the BUSH LIES department.




http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-10-05-wagner_x.htm

What happened to looted Iraqi nuclear material?
By Brett Wagner
Posted 10/5/2003 6:59 PM

The release Thursday of chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay's report detailing America's six-month search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has reinflamed the debate over whether anyone will ever uncover that country's alleged stockpiles of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.

A great irony, however, seems to have gotten lost in that debate: As a direct result of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq without sufficient forces to secure and protect its nuclear research and storage facilities from rampant looting, enough radioactive material to build scores of dirty bombs now is missing and may be on its way to the international black market.

***

The White House knew all along, for example, that enormous quantities of dangerous nuclear materials were at the Tuwaitha nuclear storage facility near Baghdad, sealed and accounted for by the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency. Soon after the war began, the IAEA warned the White House that it should strive to secure the facility quickly. When word of looting at the site began to leak out through the international media, the IAEA again warned the White House.

The looting, however, went on for more than two weeks before the U.S. took any action. When the site was finally secured and U.S. authorities permitted a brief inspection by IAEA officials, the inspectors were inexplicably forbidden to check the status of highly radioactive materials that could be used in dirty bombs. Many of these materials are now unaccounted for. What the inspectors were allowed to verify is how much uranium is now missing: at least 22 pounds.

Other looted nuclear sites include the Baghdad Nuclear Research Center, where significant quantities of partially enriched uranium, cesium, strontium and cobalt were stored. U.S. survey teams have not been able to determine how many of those materials are missing.

<more>

Brett Wagner is president of the California Center for Strategic Studies and a professor at the U.S. Naval War College




More links in these old DU threads:

Wed Jul-16-03 07:22 PM
The Iraqi Uranium Trifecta
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=52593

Tue Jul-22-03 05:12 PM
Tuwaitha, PROOF that Bush LIED (repost)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=63025

Sun Oct-05-03 06:21 PM
Traitorgate + Tuwaitha = Total WH Meltdown
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=476777

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
EuroObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. More documenting this story (1)
"In May 2003, coalition forces visited the former yellowcake extraction plant at Al-Qaim and discovered 16 drums of yellowcake and radioactive waste—materials we believe were associated with the pre-1991 nuclear weapons program. These drums were transferred in late June 2003 to the yellowcake storage facility located at Tuwaitha. There is no evidence that this material had been produced after Desert Storm" - Iraq Survey Group Final Report - http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2004/isg-final-report/isg-final-report_vol2_nuclear-03.htm

Then read here: "'Looting' at Iraq nuclear sites", BBC, Tuesday, 6 May, 2003 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3002169.stm

<snip>

Two reports over the weekend gave rise to concern:

* On Saturday, a Washington Post reporter travelling with a special US defence department team visited the Baghdad Nuclear Research Facility. US soldiers at the site told him Iraqis had been "coming in by the score" for two weeks. The team found radioactive material scattered around the site.

* Also on Saturday, a New York Times reporter with the same team visited the nearby Tuwaitha site, again finding radioactive material stored haphazardly around the site and indications that, even by Saturday, little or nothing had been done to prevent looting.

But on Monday, a State Department spokesman played down the Washington Post report, saying that none of the material involved was suitable for making nuclear weapons.

</snip>

- And this is far from being the only credible report published at the time.

... But then, a year later, came this kind of stuff:

<snip>

U.S. Removed Radioactive Materials From Iraq Facility
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32195-2004Jul6.html

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 7, 2004; Page A16

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham announced yesterday that almost two tons of low-enriched uranium and about 1,000 radioactive samples used for research had been removed from Iraq's Tuwaitha Nuclear Center and brought to the United States for security reasons.

The airlift of the radioactive materials was completed June 23, Abraham said in a statement, "to keep potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists." Less sensitive radiological materials -- used for medical, agricultural or industrial purposes -- were left in Iraq, according to a Department of Energy statement.

</snip>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EuroObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks Stephanie - and recommended for CONTEXT! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ebal Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. 1.77 metric tons removed
July 6, 2004
"U.S. Removes Iraqi Nuclear and Radiological Materials
Twenty experts from DOE’s national laboratory complex packaged 1.77 metric tons of low-enriched uranium and roughly 1000 highly radioactive sources from the former Iraq nuclear research facility. The DOD airlifted the material to the United States on June 23 and provided security, coordination, planning, ground transportation, and funding for the mission."

http://www.doe.gov/engine/content.do?PUBLIC_ID=16141&BT_CODE=PR_PRESSRELEASES&TT_CODE=PRESSRELEASE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Interesting -
So they removed what they could ONE YEAR LATER!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ebal Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. not sure of the dates
They just say they completed the secure and remove project at that time.

No mention of when the secure portion started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
5. Where do you think the insurgents are getting all their weapons from?
The weapons caches that the US left unguarded after the invasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. WHY did they do it?
It's incomprehensible. Is it just bad planning and stupidity?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #5
16. This was almost an issue last October during the election.
Then Osama sent his video and the media lost interest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EuroObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
6. Please kick & recommend this now ESSENTIAL information! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. They didn't secure ONE site
Not ONE. If you claim to know WMD exist, then it follows that you have to know WHERE they exist. And if that's the case, you would TELL the generals who would send in special ops to secure those locations. That was not done. Not with one single location.

Talk to the Special Ops who went in before the war. What did they find??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. k&r
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EuroObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Good on you, Karenina! Synchronicity? n/t
...I can't recommend any more (nor can Stephanie).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EuroObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
11. Looks like we're sinking again with this, Stephanie,
Edited on Thu Nov-10-05 03:51 PM by EuroObserver
(which may be psycho-sociologically significant).

But at least maybe that talented, most eloquent (Flame-case oriented) writer Will Pitt noticed...

ed: to add (Flame-case)

ed. again to add "most eloquent".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
13. This was the kicker right here >>>>
http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/World/reuters20030716_192.html

But an IAEA spokeswoman said the agency had not been permitted by U.S. occupation authorities to check the status of Tuwaitha's stocks of highly-radioactive cesium-137, cobalt-160 and other materials which could be used in dirty bombs.

"There were around 400 of these radioactive sources stored at Tuwaitha," IAEA's Melissa Fleming said.

Witnesses have said that villagers near Tuwaitha, especially children, have shown symptoms of radiation sickness.

"Any case of radiation sickness would probably be from these highly-radioactive sources, not from the low-grade natural uranium at Location C," Fleming said.<more>


It was about at that point that my support for the war and for this administration and for Republicans in general started fading away and turning into the ardent and passionate anti-GOP person I am today. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EuroObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Good job there Roland!
This is the TRUTH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Wow! good for you!
Yeah, one would think a little radiation poisong inflicted on children would turn most people against the Bush crime family, but how would they know about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EuroObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
17. So, to summarize in a (if I'm able) nutshell:
Edited on Thu Nov-10-05 11:03 PM by EuroObserver
While the Niger Yellowcake false information story was being promulgated by the WHIG as anonther (vital) justification for invading Iraq (sorry, I refuse to say go to War: there was never, strictly legally-speaking any war); leading apparently on this basis for example Mr. BLiar and his team of unelected so-called 'advisers' in the UK to conjure up out of the sexed-up thin air the idea that the UK could be hit by an Iraqui Nuclear Missile on a mere 45 minutes notice; and leading apparently Mr. President Shrub to quote 'British Intelligence' in the now-famous 16 words of his pre-invasion 'State of the Union' address as being aware of a dastardly attempt on the part of 'Saddam' to procure Yellowcake from Niger; (am I getting lost already?); such almost completely harmless, unthreatening material was already present in Iraq (and had been left in place precisely because it represented no threat) since the aftermath of the 1991 Pappy Bush-Saddam confrontation.

And, what's more, the so-called 'professionals' of the US Department of Defense and other inspectors, being fully aware of the presence of this material in Iraq at the time chose not even to bother to secure same, in fact maybe allowed it to be looted (and, almost certainly, poison local people) - being also fully aware that this stuff was not at all relevant to anyone other than, shall we say, propagandists and similar spin-doctors who, however, had their eyes off the ball at the time.

So that when, two or three years later, it would suddenly become to appear to be important to discuss (in the context of actual and possible criminal legal proceedings (Nov 2005) related to those who may have lightly lied in order to provoke a series of crimes against humanity), and there would suddenly be a perceived need to discuss the already debunked lie about how Saddam sought yellowcake in NIger - well, they found the ground in a most remarkable manner dissolving away under their very own feet.

Leaving the aforesaid LIARS with not an inch to stand on. Even though, one may be inclined to add, one Ms. Judy Miller, ace NYT reporter, may have chosen not to investgate; and even though, in order to protect the reputation of one Mr. Anthony BLiar from charges of being in any way shape or form 'sexed-up' or exaggerated, a man is dead in still mysterious circumstances by the name of Dr. David Kelly and a once at least semi-independent and at least semi-honourable top-level media channel (the BBC) has been, shall we say, semi-screwed.

I don't know how many are listening, but I sincerely hope we are quite a few.

I guess I need to go and lie down and get over this anger. Be back in a while...

ed: (I won't bother to edit. P?lease excuse my wonky keyboard, brain and finfers, sorry, fingers. And passion.)

ed to add: ", brain and finfers, sorry, fingers".

ed. again to add: " (the BBC)"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kineneb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
18. Thanks for the info.
I listen to Bernie Ward (KGO) late at night, and he has mentioned that Saddam would not have needed any extra yellow-cake uranium, since before our invasion he was in possesion of a rather large quantity. The deal is, of course, the inspectors had overseen the complete dismantling of Iraq's nuclear program.

So here was all this material, along with goodness knows how much regular explosives, just sitting around in ammo dumps and warehouses. And do the troops secure these sources? Of course not! They secure the f***ing Ministry of Oil building, while the museums and ammo dumps are looted.
Grrrrr.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
populistdriven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-05 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
19. * has it and knows what to do when ratings get below 20
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-11-05 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. I put NOTHING past them.
NOTHING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC