U.S. Army finds Radioactive Missiles in Iraq

Here is the link, I wonder why it is taking so long to make the newstations?

www.newsmax.com...

I give your news scoop two thumbs up

Keep up the good work, very good tech info.

Is that site reliable?

This may be of interest to this, being that many here denied a number of "things", in regards to Iraq. The above is just one of them "things"...

"�THERE THEY GO AGAIN�: IA.E.A. MISSTATES ITS RECORD ON DISMANTLING SADDAM�S NUCLEAR-BOMB PROGRAM"
www.nci.org...

Excerpt:

"For IAEA to claim that they �neutralized� Saddam�s nuclear weaponization capability is dangerously inaccurate, and muddies the waters of the Iraq debate,� said Dolley [Steven Dolley, NCI research director]. �Since 1997, the Agency has operated under the assumption that Iraq could successfully fabricate a working nuclear bomb if they managed to acquire a sufficient amount of fissile material. The Agency�s latest statement correctly points out that no one outside Iraq knows the current status of Iraq�s nuclear-bomb program, in large part because there have been no inspections in nearly four years. But for IAEA to suggest that it completely eliminated Iraq�s weaponization capability prior to 1998 is irresponsible in the extreme. The Agency should recant this statement.�

Dolley, citing IAEA�s own inspection reports as documentation, said: �Iraq has never surrendered to inspectors its two completed designs for a nuclear bomb, nuclear-bomb components such as explosive lenses and neutron initiators that it is known to have possessed, or almost any documentation of its efforts to enrich uranium to bomb-grade using gas centrifuges, devices which are small and readily concealed from reconnaissance.�[5]

Moreover, IAEA has previously conceded that Iraq�s weaponization R&D---small-scale technical research devoted to the design of a nuclear bomb�s components---is not readily detected by means of inspections. IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei stated in 1998 that �no matter how comprehensive the inspection, any country-wide verification process, in Iraq or anywhere else, has a degree of uncertainty that aims to verify the absence of readily concealable objects such as small amounts of nuclear material or weapons components.�[6]

The IAEA�s own guidelines for the safeguarding of highly enriched uranium and separated plutonium gives the conversion time for transforming these materials into weapons components as on the order of seven to ten days or one to three weeks, depending on the form the materials are in (metal, oxide or nitrate) when the materials are acquired by means of diversion or theft.[7] Thus, Iraq could be capable of producing a nuclear weapon in less than a month with sufficient diverted or stolen fissile material if it has managed to fabricate and conceal all of the non-nuclear components of a weapon."


And this:

"Inspectors armed with geophysics"
www.geotimes.org...

Excerpt:

"On Monday, U.N. weapons inspectors arrived in Iraq after a four-year hiatus. Backed by a strong mandate and the threat of military force, the inspectors' mission is to ferret out clandestine nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. One of the most vital, and yet also difficult places to search will be underground. Aerial photographs, intelligence, and past experience all suggest that Iraq has stashed weapons underground: in the desert, in cities, and under expansive palace complexes.During the last round of inspections, geophysicists found millions of dollars worth of weapons-related materials buried up to 20 meters below ground in the deserts surrounding Baghdad."

The underground hunts will likely be more focused, Pike explains. On Dec. 8, under the new U.N. resolution that Iraq agreed to, Iraq must submit a detailed list of its entire cache of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. The inspectors will go to sites on that list, and other sites suggested by intelligence and aerial photographs to harbor weapons, and attempt to quantify the amounts of weapons at these places. If the inspectors show that the weapons that exist, including those belowground, do not match with what Iraq had declared, such a "breach" could trigger a meeting of the U.N. Security Council, at which the U.S. could call for a military attack against Iraq."

Amazing and overly ironic how the same many here stated and proclaimed that the UN Resolutions against Iraq did not involve military actions if non-compliance was felt unobtainable, etc.

And this:
"Iraqi: Saddam 3 Years From Nukes in '91"
story.news.yahoo.com.../ap/20040309/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_nuclear

As to your article:
Air to Air missiles with uranium...no biggie really...OR is it?

"Dirty Bomb Warheads Disappear"
www.washingtonpost.com...

Excerpts:

"Military records show that at least 38 Alazan warheads were modified to carry radioactive material, effectively creating the world's first surface-to-surface dirty bomb.

The radioactive warheads are not known to have been used. But now, according to experts and officials, they have disappeared.

But the existence of "radiological warheads" for the Alazan was unknown until two years ago, when military documents describing them were obtained by the Institute for Policy Studies, a research group in Chisinau, the Moldovan capital.

The documents, which were provided to The Washington Post, are a series of official letters written in 1994 by a Transdniester civil defense commander, Col. V. Kireev, who apparently became concerned about radiation given off by the rockets.

One document described an inventory of 38 "isotopic radioactive warheads of missiles of the Alazan type," including 24 that were attached to rocket. In the two other documents, the commander requested technical help in dealing with radiation exposure related to storage of the warheads. He complained that uniforms of soldiers working with the warheads were so contaminated that they had to be "destroyed by burning and burying."

May find this handy-dandy also:
"Bio-Chemical Weapons & Saddam: A History."
www.freerepublic.com...



regards
seekerof

Originally posted by Laxpla
Is that site reliable?

A damn sight more reliable than ABC, NBC, CNN, BBC, USA Today, New York Times, LA Times, and most other "mainstream" (matter of opinion) sources as far as I am concerned. They may be into Kerry bashing (which I happen to be fine with), but they have never posted anything about him that wasn't backed by actual facts. They do, however, have some serious writers when it comes to details about national defense issues and whatever our enemies, oh forgive me, I mean international allies are trying to do off of our radar screens.

[Edited on 9-3-2004 by Crazyhorse]

Oh yeah, that is definately top notch equipment right there...

Look at them, there frickin covered in dirt, I wouldn't be surprised if the Iraqis forgot about them.

Originally posted by MrJingles
Oh yeah, that is definately top notch equipment right there...

Look at them, there frickin covered in dirt, I wouldn't be surprised if the Iraqis forgot about them.

Excellent find Crazyhorse!!!
The missile may be covered with dirt, but that doesn't prevent it from working - using that logic no one would be able to drive their car if it was dirty and needed washing...
I have seen weather and elements testing on missiles built by Raytheon, I've seen one covered in mud, get sprayed off with a fire hose and launched still wet from the washing... hit it's target too.

Seekerof, you must discharge every single time you hear even the slightest hint of WMD in Iraq. It's pretty funny, I have to say.

[Edited on 9-3-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]

Will you look at that!

However, it seems like something the U.S. will have to twist and turn to make it look right. My guess is Iraq bought the weapons for purposes of air combat, not to sell or use them as dirty bombs. So do they count as the "smoking guns?" No. The U.S. has nuclear-tipped torpedoes, and are they considered WMD? On the CONTEMPORARY sense, no. Because the intention was to blast a submarine to bits, not to cause pandemonium, it's not WMD in the way we see it today: weapons of terror. So they don't really help the U.S. case for war. The fact they were in AA-8 "Aphids" to this day probably shows that to this day they were meant to be used in air combat, not as weapons of terror.

I have a feeling, though, the Bush admin will be sly enough to call the hazardous propellant of the AS-9 "Kyle" missiles chemical weapons. Yeah, like U.S. missile propellant is water.

I guess you forgot to quote this also?

"U.S. bomb experts noted the R-60 warheads are similar in design and content to a so-called "dirty bomb" that could contaminate a small area with radioactive materials"

Keep diggin'...


Perhaps you can read this in its entirety also?

"Dirty Bomb Warheads Disappear"
www.washingtonpost.com...



seekerof

[Edited on 9-3-2004 by Seekerof]

Those R-60s are simply short range Air to Air missiles that Russians have been arming MiGs with for years...they use depleted uranium in the warhead, as many modern arms do, and while this isn't good for the environment, it hardly qualifies as weapons of mass destruction.

Originally posted by intelgurl

Originally posted by MrJingles
Oh yeah, that is definately top notch equipment right there...

Look at them, there frickin covered in dirt, I wouldn't be surprised if the Iraqis forgot about them.

Excellent find Crazyhorse!!!
The missile may be covered with dirt, but that doesn't prevent it from working - using that logic no one would be able to drive their car if it was dirty and needed washing...
I have seen weather and elements testing on missiles built by Raytheon, I've seen one covered in mud, get sprayed off with a fire hose and launched still wet from the washing... hit it's target too.

Yeah, but I bet that this needed a bit more than a simple washing before it worked again.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Yeah, but I bet that this needed a bit more than a simple washing before it worked again.

Heh, coincidentally, those planes are both armed with the R-60s.

Originally posted by Shoktek
Those R-60s are simply short range Air to Air missiles that Russians have been arming MiGs with for years...they use depleted uranium in the warhead, as many modern arms do, and while this isn't good for the environment, it hardly qualifies as weapons of mass destruction.

Yes, Shoktek, you are absolutely correct. But what it does do is "imply" and add to the "circumstantial implications".


seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Yes, Shoktek, you are absolutely correct. But what it does do is "imply" and add to the "circumstantial implications".

Implications of...having some russian figher jets? We already knew this...the ICBMs, seekerof, chemical weapons, biological agents, show them to me!!

I think it brings up a good point. Those soldiers were operating in that particular area for almost 3 months and did'nt even notice those Migs until the wind cleared enough of the sand away. Saddam had literally thousands of miles of featureless desert and a decade to practice his skills of concealement from the Western powers that cared. I dont think that they are going to find a football field full of WMD, but discounting the possibility that they are going to find anything at all so soon is nothing more than playing presidential politics.

For all anybody knows, the only way to find a stash is with a set of GPS coordinates. Plus theres the military trucks hauling butt back and forth across the Syrian border www.debka.com... (There are many stories about this, but this was the most detailed link I could find), and the thousands of Amptrophine(I think I spelled it right) injectors (which can be used to give temporary immunity from the effects of nerve agents) that Saddam was trying to purchase from Egypt in a rush before the invasion as well. There's so much more.

Between all of the inflamed rethoric, accusations and official statements being tossed around by anyone with an opinion before the invasion, not one of them ever stated (well, except for Saddam, lot of good it did him) that Iraq never had WMD before the war like many of them are claiming now. Is'nt that like betting on a horse after the race is already over with?

[Edited on 10-3-2004 by Crazyhorse]

Originally posted by MrJingles
Oh yeah, that is definately top notch equipment right there...

Look at them, there frickin covered in dirt, I wouldn't be surprised if the Iraqis forgot about them.

lol, pretty funny post, but I'd tend to agree that it probably still does work and the dirt tells little about whether or not the Iraqi's forgot about it, or recently burried it.

and the thousands of Amptrophine(I think I spelled it right) injectors (which can be used to give temporary immunity from the effects of nerve agents) that Saddam was trying to purchase from Egypt in a rush before the invasion as well. There's so much more.

Actually Atropene is used to counteract the effects of nerve agents. You take it after being exposed in order to survive the attack. It does NOT give you immunity from the affects.

r u sure that this info is correct? if they had found nukes, then the U.S would've told the whole world already to prove that their hunch about WMDs was correct