 |
| |
|
|
Master Zen
|
 |
of naughty
Jan 2003
time: 23:32
|
|
quote:
Iraq Scientists: Lied About Nuke Weapons
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent
Iraqi scientists never revived their long-dead nuclear bomb program, and in fact lied to Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) about how much progress they were making before U.S.-led attacks shut the operation down for good in 1991, Iraqi physicists say.
Before that first Gulf War (news - web sites), the chief of the weapons program resorted to "blatant exaggeration" in telling Iraq (news - web sites)'s president how much bomb material was being produced, key scientist Imad Khadduri writes in a new book.
Other leading physicists, in Baghdad interviews, said the hope for an Iraqi atomic bomb was never realistic. "It was all like building sand castles," said Abdel Mehdi Talib, Baghdad University's dean of sciences.
Seven months after a U.S.-British invasion toppled Saddam's Baath Party government, Iraqi scientists have grown more vocal in countering Bush administration claims, used to justify the war, that Baghdad had "reconstituted" nuclear weapons development, and that it once was a mere six months from making a bomb.
At best, Khadduri writes, it would have taken Iraq several years to build a nuclear weapon if the 1991 war and subsequent U.N. inspections had not intervened.
His self-published "Iraq's Nuclear Mirage," a chronicle of years of secret weapons work and of a final escape into exile, is part of this senior scientist's emergence from a low profile in Canada — intended to refute what he calls a "massive deception" in Washington that led the United States into war.
Months of searching by hundreds of U.S. experts have found no trace of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons in Iraq, just as U.N. inspectors found none before the war. No Iraqi scientists have confirmed the programs were revived in recent years.
Bush administration officials still speak, nonetheless, of a threat from such weapons — of Baghdad's "robust plans" for them, as Vice President **** Cheney (news - web sites) puts it — in defending last March's U.S. invasion of Iraq. They offer no hard evidence, however.
Khadduri, a U.S.- and British-educated physicist, writes that he did theoretical work on nuclear weapons as long ago as the mid-1970s, after joining Iraq's Atomic Energy Commission. By the late 1980s, as the secret bomb program accelerated, he was in a pivotal position as coordinator of all its scientific and engineering information.
The U.N. inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who dismantled the bomb program after Iraq's defeat in the 1991 war, saw Khadduri as a key source and conducted an all-day interview with him earlier this year in Toronto, where he has resided since 1998.
"Iraq's Nuclear Mirage," available via online booksellers, dismisses the U.S. contention that the atom-bomb establishment was somehow resurrected after the IAEA demolished it, U.N. inspectors were stationed in Iraq and Iraqi specialists were scattered.
"Where is the scientific and engineering staff required for such an enormous effort?" he asks. "Where are the buildings and infrastructure?"
The continuing U.S. weapons hunt amounts to no more than "investigating mirages," he says.
An ex-bombmaker still in Iraq is just as dismissive of the unsubstantiated U.S. allegations.
"There was no point in trying to revive this program. There was no material, no equipment, no scientists," former bomb designer Sabah Abdul Noor said in a recent interview at Baghdad's Technology University.
"Scientists were scattered and under the eyes of inspectors, totally scattered. To do a project, you have to be together."
Talib, the newly elected university dean, was an anti-Baathist who didn't participate in the bomb program, but was close to many who did. They vastly oversold their accomplishments before 1991, the physicist said.
"They put a lot of lies on Saddam Hussein," he said in a Baghdad interview. "They took a lot of money out of him through what you call, in English, bluffing." When their installations were finally demolished, it "saved their necks" by burying their mistakes, he said. "They could tell Saddam, `There's nothing left.'"
Khadduri, in his core position in the program, could attest to the overselling.
He writes that when he transferred top-secret documents of bomb program chief Jafar Dhia Jafar to an optical disc in 1991, he found the "blatant exaggeration" in a 1990 report to Saddam.
With its clever wording, Khadduri said in a telephone interview from Toronto, "one could easily have been convinced we had produced a couple of kilograms of enriched uranium instead of a couple of grams" — that is, about four pounds of bomb material instead of a fraction of an ounce.
A bomb would have required some 40 pounds of highly enriched uranium.
In a 1997 summary, the IAEA said there were no indications the Iraqis ever produced more than a few grams of such material. It also said there were "no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical capability for the production of amounts of weapon-usable nuclear material of any practical significance."
Khadduri and others said the design and actual production of a bomb would have been an extremely difficult task.
It was an impossible quest, "all futility," said one of Baghdad's senior nuclear physicists, Hamed M. al-Bahili.
Al-Bahili, who joined the Atomic Energy Commission in 1968 but remained outside the weapons program, said his colleagues inside "all knew they wouldn't achieve results." As for whether the program was later revived, he said, "these American inspectors are wasting their time."
|
so Mr. Bush, what's the excuse now?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
in order for Washington to need an excuse yuo have to show two things
first that Iraq was not a danger
second that the US knew this
if everyone was saying that Iraq had them, than of course there was a good chance that the US Gov would think that they had them
Jon Miller
note that I do not approve at all some of the things this adminstration has done in Iraq (I was fine with the war, but what went on before and after I am not to hot about)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
That was a brilliant ****ing lie that deceived the entire world, including Saddam.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
Master Zen:
They tried to justify the war with three other excuses as well. The liberation of the Iraqi people, the links between Saddam and Al Qaeda, and the outrgaeous treatment of the UN by Saddam.
Of course, all those excuses were blatant lies, but you don't make omelettes without breaking eggs. |
liberation - not a lie
links with Al Queda- deffinite lie (and this pissed me off also)
treatment of UN - not a lie but not worth a war
the only problem is that the administration did not treat it like a war of liberation
that was just sort of thrown in there at the end, as we can see by the administrations actions after the war
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
my problems stem mostly from
being too confident about the existence of WoMD, claiming links with Al Queda (or blowing up the small ones which were there), and not acting in such a way as to best help Iraq to liberation
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:32
|
|
quote:
Fooled Hussein (if THIS is true), but fooling Bush and any other's is Bush's fault? |
No, but starting a war IS Bush's fault. He needs to own up, and take personal responsibility for his actions. I want Bush to say "Yes, I started this war - it was not a response to aggression from Iraq, but an offensive war." He doesn't even have to admit to being wrong in his decision to go to war - and I'll even grant the point that if he went to war because he legitimately believed, from valid intelligence, that Iraq had or was close to having WMD, he was not maliciously wrong. I just want a simple admission from Bush that he started a war, and not try to blame others (Saddam) for his actions.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-11-2003 23:43
|