"380 Tons of Explosive Story" - SEE "DRUDGE"

[Prospero]

Yes, it means that only 75% of our soldiers disagree with you.

I would hope so.  I'm surprised at 25% as I thought it would be lower.  Although maybe it is higher than 25% as the doubters may be hesitant to express their misgiving.  20 years from now, more will agree with me.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You guys do realize that NBC said that Drudge is wrong and the NY Times is right on this?

[J. J.]

You guys do realize that NBC said that Drudge is wrong and the NY Times is right on this?

Not as of yet.  Here is what the story really said:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

"The war in Iraq began March 20. Army officials told NBC News on condition of anonymity that troops from the Army’s 3rd Infantry did not arrive at Al-Qaqaa until April 4, finding “looters everywhere” carrying what they could out on their backs.

"The troops searched bunkers and found conventional weapons but no high explosives, the officials said. Six days later, the 101st Airborne Division arrived. Neither group was specifically searching for HMX or RDX, and the complex is so large — with more than 1,000 buildings — that it is not clear that the troops even saw the bunkers that might have held the explosives"

MSNBC is still saying the same thing as I'm typing this.  I guess jfool can't read.

[CollectiveInterest]

Was this 380 tons of explosives more of a danger to the USA before or after Bush invaded Iraq?

[J. J.]

Was this 380 tons of explosives more of a danger to the USA before or after Bush invaded Iraq?

About equal, considering who the owner was.  His minions might still have it and picked it up before the US Army arrived.  It's also possible that it was captured and destroyed at another location.

[J. J.]

Yeah, no problem there, no story.

"But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away.”

You missed it, again.  Here it is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

"The war in Iraq began March 20. Army officials told NBC News on condition of anonymity that troops from the Army’s 3rd Infantry did not arrive at Al-Qaqaa until April 4, finding “looters everywhere” carrying what they could out on their backs."

You have them guard something that wasn't there?   When the Army arrived, it was gone.  No recanting, as you previously claimed, either.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Yeah, no problem there, no story.

"But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away.”

You missed it, again.  Here it is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

"The war in Iraq began March 20. Army officials told NBC News on condition of anonymity that troops from the Army’s 3rd Infantry did not arrive at Al-Qaqaa until April 4, finding “looters everywhere” carrying what they could out on their backs."

You have them guard something that wasn't there?   When the Army arrived, it was gone.  No recanting, as you previously claimed, either.

God damn you're annoying. Anyways, when the army arrived, they did not do a search then. Searching for the explosives was not a priority. Go read for yourself here.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/26/13489/620

NOTHING WAS DONE TO SECURE THE AREA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


QUIT MISSING THE GOD DAMN POINT!!!!!

[shankbear]

You are offensive fern.  Stop the useless cussing.  Stop citing the useless www.dailykos.com as a credible source.

Get a life.

[J. J.]

[

You missed it, again.  Here it is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

"The war in Iraq began March 20. Army officials told NBC News on condition of anonymity that troops from the Army’s 3rd Infantry did not arrive at Al-Qaqaa until April 4, finding “looters everywhere” carrying what they could out on their backs."

You have them guard something that wasn't there?   When the Army arrived, it was gone.  No recanting, as you previously claimed, either.

<<Jfool tasteless expletive indicating his ignorance deleleted>> you're annoying. Anyways, when the army arrived, they did not do a search then. Searching for the explosives was not a priority. Go read for yourself here.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/26/13489/620

NOTHING WAS DONE TO SECURE THE AREA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


QUIT MISSING THE <<Jfool[/b's] tasteless expletive indicating his ignorance deleleted>>  POINT!!!!!

The POINT is, they were there, with an NBC embed, and there wasn't anything to see.  360 metric tons of explosives cannot be hidded in a broom closet.  It will take up space, a lot of space.  They will see something.  Don't be dense and offensive.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

[

You missed it, again.  Here it is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

"The war in Iraq began March 20. Army officials told NBC News on condition of anonymity that troops from the Army’s 3rd Infantry did not arrive at Al-Qaqaa until April 4, finding “looters everywhere” carrying what they could out on their backs."

You have them guard something that wasn't there?   When the Army arrived, it was gone.  No recanting, as you previously claimed, either.

<<Jfool[/b's] tasteless expletive indicating his ignorance deleleted>> you're annoying. Anyways, when the army arrived, they did not do a search then. Searching for the explosives was not a priority. Go read for yourself here.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/26/13489/620

NOTHING WAS DONE TO SECURE THE AREA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


QUIT MISSING THE <<Jfool[/b's] tasteless expletive indicating his ignorance deleleted>>  POINT!!!!!

The POINT is, they were there, with an NBC embed, and there wasn't anything to see.  360 metric tons of explosives cannot be hidded in a broom closet.  It will take up space, a lot of space.  They will see something.  Don't be dense and offensive.

It was a huge facility, and checking it was not a priority.

[J. J.]

It was a huge facility, and checking it was not a priority.

Do you have any idea how much space 40 truckloads of material takes up.  We are actually talking about the same weight as the Empire State Building.  Try to picture trying to "hide" the Empire State Building on even a "huge facility."  As explosives tend to less dense than granite and steel, it would take up more space.

You are not comprehending the amount of material involved.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It was a huge facility, and checking it was not a priority.

Do you have any idea how much space 40 truckloads of material takes up.  We are actually talking about the same weight as the Empire State Building.  Try to picture trying to "hide" the Empire State Building on even a "huge facility."  As explosives tend to less dense than granite and steel, it would take up more space.

You are not comprehending the amount of material involved.

The Empire State building weighs 365,000 tons. Off by a factor of 1000. In addition, explosives are probably more dense than the Empire State building, which is mainly filled with air. So the volume would differ by even more than a factor of 1000.

http://www.esbnyc.com/kids/kids_faq.cfm?CFID=8546723&CFTOKEN=18707286

It has a density of about 1.91. I assume they mean kilograms per liter.
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/h/hm/hmx.html

That would mean that 380 metric tons would be 200,000 lliters, or 200 cubic meters. That works out to 10 meters on each side, and 2 meters high. 

[J. J.]

You are correct on the Empire State Building, that was my error.  You are still talking something with the volume of a small house.  That isn't easy to hide.  Because of the weight, it's even harder to steal. 

According to the article, the troops, while no securing it, did look around.  Nobody saw the sealed buildings.  From the size of the unit (brigade, there would have been 3,000-6,000 people there, and while they were there, they had to secure the area.  There has been no suggestion that it was hidden when the inspectors were last there.  There was nothing there to loot.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You are correct on the Empire State Building, that was my error.  You are still talking something with the volume of a small house.  That isn't easy to hide.  Because of the weight, it's even harder to steal. 

According to the article, the troops, while no securing it, did look around.  Nobody saw the sealed buildings.  From the size of the unit (brigade, there would have been 3,000-6,000 people there, and while they were there, they had to secure the area.  There has been no suggestion that it was hidden when the inspectors were last there.  There was nothing there to loot.

If you read the accounts, they were not given orders to inventory or secure the area. Sure, some people looked around, but the facility was large enough that they weren't able to accomplish much.

[J. J.]

You are correct on the Empire State Building, that was my error.  You are still talking something with the volume of a small house.  That isn't easy to hide.  Because of the weight, it's even harder to steal. 

According to the article, the troops, while no securing it, did look around.  Nobody saw the sealed buildings.  From the size of the unit (brigade, there would have been 3,000-6,000 people there, and while they were there, they had to secure the area.  There has been no suggestion that it was hidden when the inspectors were last there.  There was nothing there to loot.

If you read the accounts, they were not given orders to inventory or secure the area. Sure, some people looked around, but the facility was large enough that they weren't able to accomplish much.

Several thousand people, securing an area, even briefly, didn't run accross something the size of a small house!  This was a combat opperation; they we're not checking into a Ramada Inn!  To secure the area, even briefly, they'd have to move through the area, to make sure there weren't a few dozen Iraqis with grenade launchers hiding there.

I'm not claim that, in the middle of a war, they stopped to inventory anything.  I am saying that somebody would have seen something, especially since they were checking for WMD's.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

New NY Times article says WH lying, and that site was not searched.

hite House officials reasserted yesterday that 380 tons of powerful explosives may have disappeared from a vast Iraqi military complex while Saddam Hussein controlled Iraq, saying a brigade of American soldiers did not find the explosives when they visited the complex on April 10, 2003, the day after Baghdad fell.
   
Advertisement

But the unit's commander said in an interview yesterday that his troops had not searched the site and had merely stopped there overnight.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/27/politics/27bomb.html?oref=login&oref=login

[khirkhib]

It was a compound of several dozen warehouses. The contents of a small house could have been overlooked quite easily.  Especailly since they weren't looking for it. This was a short stop before they went to Bagdad.  The whole, Soldiers were there, is just a kneejerk reflex defense to muddle the issue.  You would think that they would have been ordered at least to check if it were gone.  They didn't I think this is bad, really bad, but it might be to late to be an issue.

And remember we had all our satelites trained on Iraq before the war trying to find weapons of mass distruction or movement of weapons.  I think that we would have noticed it before  the war had it happened.

[shankbear]

WOW!!!! Fern says that the NY Times is calling GWB a liar.  What a friggin newsflash fern.  Oh but they have been doing that for the past three years.

They are no better than The National Inquirer.

[J. J.]

It was a compound of several dozen warehouses. The contents of a small house could have been overlooked quite easily.  Especailly since they weren't looking for it. This was a short stop before they went to Bagdad.  The whole, Soldiers were there, is just a kneejerk reflex defense to muddle the issue.  You would think that they would have been ordered at least to check if it were gone.  They didn't I think this is bad, really bad, but it might be to late to be an issue.

And remember we had all our satelites trained on Iraq before the war trying to find weapons of mass distruction or movement of weapons.  I think that we would have noticed it before  the war had it happened.

And after as well, with regard to satellites.  The thing is, they did check the base for something, WMD's.  They didn't see these sealed bunkers?  The ones sealed by a UN agency.  That would attract attention.  It's like looking for a piano in a warehouse where there is a car, a limo.  They'll see the limo, even if they don't do anything about it.

[ATFFL]

Yeah, no problem there, no story.

"But as far as we could tell, there was no move to secure the weapons, nothing to keep looters away.”

You missed it, again.  Here it is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

"The war in Iraq began March 20. Army officials told NBC News on condition of anonymity that troops from the Army’s 3rd Infantry did not arrive at Al-Qaqaa until April 4, finding “looters everywhere” carrying what they could out on their backs."

You have them guard something that wasn't there?   When the Army arrived, it was gone.  No recanting, as you previously claimed, either.

God damn you're annoying. Anyways, when the army arrived, they did not do a search then. Searching for the explosives was not a priority. Go read for yourself here.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/26/13489/620

NOTHING WAS DONE TO SECURE THE AREA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


QUIT MISSING THE GOD DAMN POINT!!!!!

Let me get this straight, MSNBC is a less reliable source for a story about an NBC reporter than KOS is? 

[CollectiveInterest]

Do Bush supporters want to discuss the truth or just try to spin this?

[J. J.]

Do Bush supporters want to discuss the truth or just try to spin this?

The truth is that is it not easy to remove 380 metric tons (tonnes) of explosives.  The truth is that the area was occupied, for several days and nobody saw the "seals" on the bunkers that contained the explosives.  The truth is that the inspectors only saw that the seals were intact prior to the start of the war.

That is being addressed.

[shankbear]

Looks like th DofD is reviewing sat photos and intell that showed heavy truck traffic out of Al Qaqaa prior to the war.  Not sure if it will be released.  Member of 101st on Fox tonight was there and saw deep truck ruts from the bunkers.  That was when they first arrived.  Hoping to watch his story.

[ATFFL]

The NYT reported that in April  that a search of the facility was thurough enough to find a suspicious white powder, but not 380 tons of high explosives.

This was before the war ended.

[J. J.]

NBC reported that satellite images of a large number of trucks around the site in the days before the war.

It also reported that the access road in was a major US convoy route, so it's unikely that anything large got moved after the Army reached the site.