HMX explosives left unsecured by troops
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:51:51 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
  HMX explosives left unsecured by troops
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Author Topic: HMX explosives left unsecured by troops  (Read 27617 times)
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 28, 2004, 06:16:14 PM »


They weren't given orders to secure the site. I blame the higher ups, not the rank and file.

Perhaps, in the case shown on the videotape, because it was in the perimeter of the US Forces?

What?


Jfool according to the tape, the bunker that was videotaped was within the security perimeter of the US incampment.  Maybe you need to pay attention when you watch the video tape.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 28, 2004, 06:17:57 PM »


They weren't given orders to secure the site. I blame the higher ups, not the rank and file.

Perhaps, in the case shown on the videotape, because it was in the perimeter of the US Forces?

What?


Jfool according to the tape, the bunker that was videotaped was within the security perimeter of the US incampment.  Maybe you need to pay attention when you watch the video tape.

GPS put it at right by the facility. And there's those IAEA seals, and explosives that appear to be HMX.

Keep spinning.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 28, 2004, 06:23:11 PM »


It just proves you're using smaller trucks. Yawn.
The weapons inspectors say that it was HMX. You might want to read the updated part. It's over for Bush.

Let me try to dumb this down for you.  If each truck can carry 9 tons, and they make one trip per day, it takes 40 days to move the explosives.  There was a 20 day period between the video tape and when the army did the inspection.

They still have the problem of doing it, within the perimeter of a Brigade of Airborne.  After 10 or 15 trips, somebody will notice something.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 28, 2004, 06:24:50 PM »


It just proves you're using smaller trucks. Yawn.
The weapons inspectors say that it was HMX. You might want to read the updated part. It's over for Bush.

Let me try to dumb this down for you.  If each truck can carry 9 tons, and they make one trip per day, it takes 40 days to move the explosives.  There was a 20 day period between the video tape and when the army did the inspection.

They still have the problem of doing it, within the perimeter of a Brigade of Airborne.  After 10 or 15 trips, somebody will notice something.

The area was NOT SECURED.  So 2 of your smaller trucks per day. Whatever.

Why should I have to explain how they might have been taken after we confirmed they were still there?
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 28, 2004, 06:28:04 PM »


GPS put it at right by the facility. And there's those IAEA seals, and explosives that appear to be HMX.

Keep spinning.

As you pointed out the facility was large; neither the newscrew nor the soldiers identifuied it as such.  Of course, you can, jfool, from a grainy internet video, right?  Because of all your experience with UN, right jfool?

You Dudge bust is a bust and we are all laughing at you.  Soon we all be laughing at Kerry.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 28, 2004, 06:31:49 PM »


GPS put it at right by the facility. And there's those IAEA seals, and explosives that appear to be HMX.

Keep spinning.

As you pointed out the facility was large; neither the newscrew nor the soldiers identifuied it as such.  Of course, you can, jfool, from a grainy internet video, right?  Because of all your experience with UN, right jfool?

You Dudge bust is a bust and we are all laughing at you.  Soon we all be laughing at Kerry.

WEAPONS INSPECTERS IDENTIFIED IT

You just won't admit defeat. Yawn.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 28, 2004, 06:36:19 PM »


The area was NOT SECURED.  So 2 of your smaller trucks per day. Whatever.

Why should I have to explain how they might have been taken after we confirmed they were still there?

Well, the area is within the defensive perimeter of a brigade of the 101st Airborne, according to the video.  So, it really is in a relatively secure place.  

So now you have two trucks, "whatever," going into the perimeter, daily for 20 days, of an encampment of elements of the 101st Airborne.  Then after taking time to load up the trucks, they drive down the road loaded with American convoys.  That really makes sense, jfool.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 28, 2004, 06:38:39 PM »


GPS put it at right by the facility. And there's those IAEA seals, and explosives that appear to be HMX.

Keep spinning.

As you pointed out the facility was large; neither the newscrew nor the soldiers identifuied it as such.  Of course, you can, jfool, from a grainy internet video, right?  Because of all your experience with UN, right jfool?

You Dudge bust is a bust and we are all laughing at you.  Soon we all be laughing at Kerry.

WEAPONS INSPECTERS IDENTIFIED IT

You just won't admit defeat. Yawn.

No they didn't; that's the problem.  They did identify a seal, not what was for.  We also have all of this happening within the parimeter of an encampment of US forces.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 28, 2004, 06:40:46 PM »


GPS put it at right by the facility. And there's those IAEA seals, and explosives that appear to be HMX.

Keep spinning.

As you pointed out the facility was large; neither the newscrew nor the soldiers identifuied it as such.  Of course, you can, jfool, from a grainy internet video, right?  Because of all your experience with UN, right jfool?

You Dudge bust is a bust and we are all laughing at you.  Soon we all be laughing at Kerry.

WEAPONS INSPECTERS IDENTIFIED IT

You just won't admit defeat. Yawn.

No they didn't; that's the problem.  They did identify a seal, not what was for.  We also have all of this happening within the parimeter of an encampment of US forces.

They say HMX
Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 28, 2004, 06:54:09 PM »

You guys are just spinning

The HMX was there.
Than Sadam moved it before we got there.
No Russia moved it to Syria
The HMX wasn't there when the troops get there
But the HMX was there.
US troops opened some of the seals.
intelligence knew about it they didn't tell their military counterparts or conversly the military counterparts didn't do anything.
There were 500 other sites like this.
Bush was told to go in with overwhelming force.  Why to secure the weapons and the bases.
Bush's team decided to go in with less forces than needed.

The terrorists are more terrorists today then there were 4 years ago.

The terrorists are better armed today than they were 4 years ago.

And I blame the president.  And had this happend during a democratic presidency I would have blamed the president too.  can't you detach yourself from your party for a second and see how ed up this is.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 28, 2004, 07:31:26 PM »

You guys are just spinning

The HMX was there.
Than Sadam moved it before we got there.
No Russia moved it to Syria
The HMX wasn't there when the troops get there
But the HMX was there.
US troops opened some of the seals.
intelligence knew about it they didn't tell their military counterparts or conversly the military counterparts didn't do anything.
There were 500 other sites like this.
Bush was told to go in with overwhelming force.  Why to secure the weapons and the bases.
Bush's team decided to go in with less forces than needed.

The terrorists are more terrorists today then there were 4 years ago.

The terrorists are better armed today than they were 4 years ago.

And I blame the president.  And had this happend during a democratic presidency I would have blamed the president too.  can't you detach yourself from your party for a second and see how <<khirhibs's tasteless expletive deleted>> up this is.

Former weapons inspector says he can't say that it was HMX on the tape, on CNN right now.

Pentagon released a satellite photo of trucks around the bunkers from before the war but after the last inspection. 

You run into the logistical problems of taking these out of the area after the Americans arrive.

There is circumstancial evidence that the explosives were not there.  I've noticed that you cannot show how the explosives could have been removed, all 360 tons of it.

I'll be perfectly free to admit that some explosives could have been taken, if they were there.  You need proof that they were there at the time the US Army showed up.

Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 28, 2004, 07:48:45 PM »

You guys are just spinning

The HMX was there.
Than Sadam moved it before we got there.
No Russia moved it to Syria
The HMX wasn't there when the troops get there
But the HMX was there.
US troops opened some of the seals.
intelligence knew about it they didn't tell their military counterparts or conversly the military counterparts didn't do anything.
There were 500 other sites like this.
Bush was told to go in with overwhelming force.  Why to secure the weapons and the bases.
Bush's team decided to go in with less forces than needed.

The terrorists are more terrorists today then there were 4 years ago.

The terrorists are better armed today than they were 4 years ago.

And I blame the president.  And had this happend during a democratic presidency I would have blamed the president too.  can't you detach yourself from your party for a second and see how <<khirhibs's tasteless expletive deleted>> up this is.

Former weapons inspector says he can't say that it was HMX on the tape, on CNN right now.

Pentagon released a satellite photo of trucks around the bunkers from before the war but after the last inspection. 

You run into the logistical problems of taking these out of the area after the Americans arrive.

There is circumstancial evidence that the explosives were not there.  I've noticed that you cannot show how the explosives could have been removed, all 360 tons of it.

I'll be perfectly free to admit that some explosives could have been taken, if they were there.  You need proof that they were there at the time the US Army showed up.



Likely HMX
Definitely stuff the IAEA was guarding
And we left it unsecured

Maybe it won't convince you, but it will convince enough reasonable people that Bush is doomed.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 28, 2004, 08:07:09 PM »


Likely HMX
Definitely stuff the IAEA was guarding
And we left it unsecured

Maybe it won't convince you, but it will convince enough reasonable people that Bush is doomed.

They could not identify it as HMX, and they still have not been clear about the seal.

No, please explain how 360 tons of explosive were removed when the roads were filled with American vehicles?  The story goes bust if you can't.  Kerry will still probably lose if you can.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 28, 2004, 08:08:16 PM »


Likely HMX
Definitely stuff the IAEA was guarding
And we left it unsecured

Maybe it won't convince you, but it will convince enough reasonable people that Bush is doomed.

They could not identify it as HMX, and they still have not been clear about the seal.

No, please explain how 360 tons of explosive were removed when the roads were filled with American vehicles?  The story goes bust if you can't.  Kerry will still probably lose if you can.

We didn't have the area guarded at all for 20 days. Why should I have to explain exactly how they went into an unguarded area, and went into unlocked buildings and removed the explosives shown in that video?
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 28, 2004, 08:16:35 PM »


We didn't have the area guarded at all for 20 days. Why should I have to explain exactly how they went into an unguarded area, and went into unlocked buildings and removed the explosives shown in that video?

First, determine if there was something there to guard.  You have to explain it because you have claimed it.  You are claiming that it was looted in a 20 day period.  Okay, how?

I frankly, from reading you posts, would bet that you coundn't.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 28, 2004, 08:18:55 PM »


We didn't have the area guarded at all for 20 days. Why should I have to explain exactly how they went into an unguarded area, and went into unlocked buildings and removed the explosives shown in that video?

First, determine if there was something there to guard.  You have to explain it because you have claimed it.  You are claiming that it was looted in a 20 day period.  Okay, how?

I frankly, from reading you posts, would bet that you coundn't.

One can easily come up with a reasonable scenario of how it was done, but why bother with this speculation. It was there and now it's gone. I don't have to prove anything.
Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 28, 2004, 08:27:39 PM »

Wow if Bush only had the integriaty and the intelectual honesty that you do JJ when he told America that Sadam had weapons of mass distruction.  We would have never gone to war.

Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 28, 2004, 08:30:43 PM »

Wow if Bush only had the integriaty and the intelectual honesty that you do JJ when he told America that Sadam had weapons of mass distruction.  We would have never gone to war.



No, I thought there were WMD's there, and I was wrong. 

I would however like you to answer the question, even using circumstancial evidence.  So far, you have not been to.  I challenge you to do so.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 28, 2004, 08:55:21 PM »

Wow if Bush only had the integriaty and the intelectual honesty that you do JJ when he told America that Sadam had weapons of mass distruction.  We would have never gone to war.



No, I thought there were WMD's there, and I was wrong. 

I would however like you to answer the question, even using circumstancial evidence.  So far, you have not been to.  I challenge you to do so.
One day:
20 reasonably size trucks
100 people

I think it's 380 regular tons, or 350 metric tons.
17.5 tons or 35,000 pounds per truck
Each person moves 90 pounds at a time, 400 loads, or 80 loads per person. The trucks are put right next to the storage area.

Maybe all done at night?


Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 28, 2004, 09:04:14 PM »

jfern i think he wants specifics. 
Names of the people that moved the explosives.
The license places on the cars.
when they clocked in clocked out etc.

The group portrait after they finished loading the last truck full.

We didn't have our head in the game and we lost the explosives.  PERIOD.  Whoops
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 28, 2004, 09:09:09 PM »

Wow if Bush only had the integriaty and the intelectual honesty that you do JJ when he told America that Sadam had weapons of mass distruction.  We would have never gone to war.



No, I thought there were WMD's there, and I was wrong. 

I would however like you to answer the question, even using circumstancial evidence.  So far, you have not been to.  I challenge you to do so.
One day:
20 reasonably size trucks
100 people

I think it's 380 regular tons, or 350 metric tons.
17.5 tons or 35,000 pounds per truck
Each person moves 90 pounds at a time, 400 loads, or 80 loads per person. The trucks are put right next to the storage area.

Maybe all done at night?




Nobody's going to notice a convoy of twenty trucks rolling down the roads occupied and being used by the US Army?  They are doing the loading next to an encampment of the 101 Airborne?

And to khirknib, I want you to honestly back up you claims.  Jfern is at least trying here.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 28, 2004, 09:46:00 PM »

Wow if Bush only had the integriaty and the intelectual honesty that you do JJ when he told America that Sadam had weapons of mass distruction.  We would have never gone to war.



No, I thought there were WMD's there, and I was wrong. 

I would however like you to answer the question, even using circumstancial evidence.  So far, you have not been to.  I challenge you to do so.
One day:
20 reasonably size trucks
100 people

I think it's 380 regular tons, or 350 metric tons.
17.5 tons or 35,000 pounds per truck
Each person moves 90 pounds at a time, 400 loads, or 80 loads per person. The trucks are put right next to the storage area.

Maybe all done at night?




Nobody's going to notice a convoy of twenty trucks rolling down the roads occupied and being used by the US Army?  They are doing the loading next to an encampment of the 101 Airborne?

And to khirknib, I want you to honestly back up you claims.  Jfern is at least trying here.

Why don't you explain to me what happened to the explosives in that video?
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 28, 2004, 09:49:34 PM »


Why don't you explain to me what happened to the explosives in that video?

For all either of us know they have been collected and destoyed.

Now, why don't you answer my question.  If the HMX was there, how was it looted?  Answer the question, if you can.  I'm challenging you.
Logged
shankbear
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 363


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 28, 2004, 11:41:32 PM »

have the interviews with the 101st troops been completely discounted?  I haven't heard any more about them.  Has the expectation od an OCTOBEr surprise already been factored into voters minds?  How many undecided voters could there be?  No DEmos or Repubs will be swayed.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 28, 2004, 11:46:37 PM »

have the interviews with the 101st troops been completely discounted?  I haven't heard any more about them.  Has the expectation od an OCTOBEr surprise already been factored into voters minds?  How many undecided voters could there be?  No DEmos or Repubs will be swayed.

If there was really a plausible story, e.g. 4-5 tons were missing, it would be damaging, and their wouldn't be any circumstancial evidence.  Whoever planted the story blew it with the 360 metric tons[/b] part.

If you're goning to lie, make it a believable lie.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 14 queries.