The Cluster Bombs and Other Guns Iraq REALLY HAS

[Timber Loftis]

Let us quit pretending that Iraq, who only 12 years ago had the world's 6th Largest army, doesn't have weapons. Here you go, members of the jury, whaddya think?

From Today's NY Times

U.S. Says Iraq Retools Rockets for Illicit Uses
By JOHN H. CUSHMAN Jr. with STEVEN R. WEISMAN

WASHINGTON, March 9 — United Nations weapons inspectors in Iraq recently discovered a new variety of rocket seemingly configured to strew bomblets filled with chemical or biological agents over large areas, United States officials say.

The reconfigured rocket warheads appear to be cobbled together from Iraq's stockpiles of imported or home-built weapons, some which Iraq had used with both conventional and chemical warheads. Iraq contends that it has destroyed all its old chemical warheads, a claim that the inspectors have not verified.

An American official who described the weapon said it was discovered in the last few months, since the United Nations inspectors returned to Iraq in November. At first, he said, Iraq told the inspectors that it was designed as a conventional cluster bomb, which would scatter explosive submunitions over its target, and not as a chemical weapon. A few days later, he said, the Iraqis conceded that some might have been configured as chemical weapons.

The distinctive appearance of the rockets' cluster munitions, heavy metal balls with holes in them, suggested their use as a way to disperse chemical or biological weapons, said the official. "If you take the kinds of fuses we know they have, and you screw them in there, when these things come out from the main frame and they explode inward, chemical agents come out," he said.

"These can be used for biological weapons, too," he said.

American officials said the discovery showed that Iraq could not be trusted to cooperate with the inspectors. They provided the information to reinforce the administrtion's point of view that weapons inspectors found incriminating evidence in Iraq.

The discovery is buttressed by information contained in a detailed, 173-page report by the inspection team, cataloging the history of Iraqi weapons programs and the United Nation's attempts to enforce compliance with its disarmament resolutions over the last 12 years.

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said today that the chief inspector for chemical and biological weapons, Hans Blix, should have made more of the evidence in that report when he appeared before the Security Council last week. "When you look at page after page of what the Iraqis have done over the years to hide, to deceive, to cheat, to keep information away from the inspectors, to change facts to fit the latest issue, and once they put that set of facts before you, when you find you those facts are false, they come up with a new set of facts — it's a constant pattern," he said on "Fox News Sunday."

Mr. Powell did not mention the rocket, but cited development of drone aircraft capable of dispensing chemical weapons as another example, and hinted that the United States would release more information about prohibited weapons as the Council debates a resolution this week. "That's the kind of thing we're going to be making some news about in the course of the week and point this out," he said. "And there are other things that have been found that I think more can be made of."

According to the detailed report by the inspection team, which was circulated at the United Nations during the Security Council's debate on a new resolution to authorize the use of force against Iraq, Baghdad has a long history of exploring novel approaches for chemical and biological weapons. It remains unclear whether the Iraqi cluster warhead is a newly developed one, devised during the absence of inspectors over the last four years, or whether its existence was kept secret before 1998, when the inspectors left.

The report, a copy of which has been provided to The New York Times, mentions that Iraq was known since 1996 to have been working on new chemical warheads at a facility known as Haidar Farm, where inspectors had discovered caches of documents and other evidence of prohibited programs with which to confront the Iraqi government.

Videotapes from Haidar, the report said, showed "personnel conducting tests of a cluster bomb that appears to utilize submunitions based, in part, on 122-millimeter warhead components."

U.S. Says Iraq Retools Rockets for Illicit Uses
(Page 2 of 2)

As early as 1988, Iraq subsequently admitted to the United Nations, it had experimented on converting short-range "Frog" rockets with a cluster warhead using aluminum shells and some components from another rocket, the Ababil 50. However, Iraq said that it had done nothing but produce drawings and that no prototypes were built.

When the evidence of those programs from Haidar Farm was analyzed in 1997, intelligence agencies supporting the United Nations weapons inspectors said materials found there included "all the necessary files and specifications to build" an unconventional, probably chemical, warhead for the Frogs.

Photographs, used by an American official to buttress the administration's position on Iraq, were said by the official to depict the newly discovered munitions.

They show a large, cylindrical body of roughly the same size as a conventional Frog missile, with a series of round cluster munitions, about the size of soccer balls or basketballs, set into cavities in the rocket. The official did not say how the photographs were obtained.

The new United Nations report, noting that Iraq had been found able to make chemical warheads for longer-range Scud missiles, said inspectors "assumed" that Iraq could do so for shorter range missiles as well.

Iraq is thought to have produced at least 50 to 75 chemical warheads for ballistic missiles, and inspectors have not confirmed that they were all destroyed. But cluster warheads of this new kind have not been described in a number of documents made public recently by the inspectors or by British and American intelligence agencies.

The report also noted that Iraq still has "significant stocks" of smaller, 122-millimeter warheads similar to those previously used as chemical weapons before the first gulf war. "Iraq's industries appear fully capable of modifying these conventional munitions for use with chemical agents as well as the indigenous production of most or all of their components," the new report from the inspectors said.

The suspect cluster munitions look strikingly different than the photos of 18 empty chemical warheads for 122-millimeter rockets found by inspectors in January of this year at a storage depot southwest of Baghdad and at another depot. Iraq explained that the existence of those warheads had simply been overlooked for many years. This time, the American official said, the inspectors found just one rocket at first.

"Then they found a second, a third, a fourth and a fifth," the official said.

"These are imported," he added. "Then they found Iraq could manufacture these indigenously, so who knows how many they have?"

The new United Nations report describes in considerable detail the inspectors' continuing uncertainty about how much chemical and biological agents Iraq may have retained. Sections of the report suggest that Iraq had tried repeatedly, and sometimes succeeded, in developing agents especially suited for cluster munitions.

[Animal]

If you know that you're going up against the largest and most technologicaly advanced war machine in the world, then I think that you'd want every weapon available at your disposal in an attempt to protect yourself.
I don't condone his actions, but look at it from his point of view for a second. The World vs. Saddam.

[Timber Loftis]

Again, Animal, Saddam gave up that right, and signed his "peace accord" in the form of Res.686 and 687. You make a good point regarding anybody on the planet but Saddam. But, Saddam gave up his weapons.

Plus, if the USA army didn't go to Baghdad when it had the chance before, there's no reason to fear it would now - absent necessity of course.

President Bush reiterated just last week that Saddam is, and always has been, in control of his fate. He just.... wont.... comply.

[Animal]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Again, Animal, Saddam gave up that right, and signed his "peace accord" in the form of Res.686 and 687. You make a good point regarding anybody on the planet but Saddam. But, Saddam gave up his weapons. Plus, if the USA army didn't go to Baghdad when it had the chance before, there's no reason to fear it would now - absent necessity of course. President Bush reiterated just last week that Saddam is, and always has been, in control of his fate. He just.... wont.... comply.

A fate that is pre determined is not fate, Timber. Saddam gave up his weapons to stop his people from getting killed further during the Gulf War, it was the only way to appease the world.

Just because he posseses them doesn't mean he's going to use them again. It's a risk and a gamble, but it's a risk and a gamble that I'd be willing to take. World peace is a huge risk, but it's not going to be accomplished without a little trust.

[Timber Loftis]

What a namby-pamby please-walk-all-over-me ignore-historical-lessons silly response. You are now stating Saddam deserved no punishment for breaking the one rule of international law, to wit INVADAING A SOVEREIGN NATION AND ANNEXING IT. You are trolling, flaming, or both, because I cannot believe someone would be so incomprehensibly polemico and asinine on this issue.

I shan't reply to you further. Go sit in the desert as a human shield. Please.

[edit] And to think, I was posting this to be informative, not argue. The subject matter of the article seems so simple, so precise, so accurate, so damning. How you can.... *snort*... *sp...* *ack...* oh, forget it.

[ 03-10-2003, 08:39 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Animal: Saddam gave up his weapons to stop his people from getting killed further during the Gulf War, it was the only way to appease the world.

Excuse me, but this is complete BS. Saddam doesn't care about his people, and please don't use that as a defense for his actions. Saddam did what he did to save his OWN ass and nothing more.

If you believe Saddam agreed to the ceasefire to spare his people's suffering I can understand your POV more than I could before... I think it's INCREDIBLY misguided, and bordering on the ridiculous, but at least I know what you are thinking you need to prevent.

Exactly who thinks Saddam cares about his people? What evidence is there that he does?

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Animal: Saddam gave up his weapons to stop his people from getting killed further during the Gulf War, it was the only way to appease the world.

Are you serious?

Am I missing something?

Are you ACTUALLY defending Saddam here?

What about saving innocent lives?

Have you forgotten that or are you only interested in saving innocents from the actions of the WEST?

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Animal: look at it from his point of view for a second. The World vs. Saddam.

OK, I'm Saddam for a second...

"The world is going to kick my butt, so I'd better stop this stupid
BS before someone starts dropping bombs on my ass."

Seems pretty simple to me, but of course, I'd be worried about the safety of the people around me, so what exactly are you trying to say? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img]

[Animal]

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: Quote: Originally posted by Animal: Saddam gave up his weapons to stop his people from getting killed further during the Gulf War, it was the only way to appease the world.

Are you serious?

Am I missing something?

Are you ACTUALLY defending Saddam here?

What about saving innocent lives?

Have you forgotten that or are you only interested in saving innocents from the actions of the WEST?[/QUOTE]I'm interested in saving innocents, period.

You don't want to let Saddam kill innocents, but's it's okay for the US and Britain to kill the same innocents all in the name of liberation.

I'm not defending Saddam, personally I don't give a rat's ass about the guy, and if the UN decides that war is the way to go, then so be it, but finding a man guilty until proven innocent is a little backwards. If he's on trial, it should at least be a fair trial.

[Animal]

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: Quote: Originally posted by Animal: look at it from his point of view for a second. The World vs. Saddam.

OK, I'm Saddam for a second...

"The world is going to kick my butt, so I'd better stop this stupid
BS before someone starts dropping bombs on my ass."

Seems pretty simple to me, but of course, I'd be worried about the safety of the people around me, so what exactly are you trying to say? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]Most people would defend themselves to the death if they believed they were right. If I'm walking down the street and get mugged by two guys, I'm gonna put up one hell of a fight. Maybe, you wouldn't, but I would.