Uh-oh . . . . -- A videotape shows a huge supply of explosives still at the Al Qaqaa munitions complex nine days after the fall of Baghdad.
The first two paragraphs of a 10-29-04 New York Times article entitled "Video Shows G.I.'s at Weapon Cache:"
A videotape made by a television crew with American troops when they opened bunkers at a sprawling Iraqi munitions complex south of Baghdad shows a huge supply of explosives still there nine days after the fall of Saddam Hussein, apparently including some sealed earlier by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The tape, broadcast on Wednesday night by the ABC affiliate in Minneapolis, appeared to confirm a warning given earlier this month to the agency by Iraqi officials, who said that hundreds of tons of high-grade explosives, powerful enough to bring down buildings or detonate nuclear weapons, had vanished from the site after the invasion of Iraq.
A videotape made by a television crew with American troops when they opened bunkers at a sprawling Iraqi munitions complex south of Baghdad shows a huge supply of explosives still there nine days after the fall of Saddam Hussein, apparently including some sealed earlier by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The tape, broadcast on Wednesday night by the ABC affiliate in Minneapolis, appeared to confirm a warning given earlier this month to the agency by Iraqi officials, who said that hundreds of tons of high-grade explosives, powerful enough to bring down buildings or detonate nuclear weapons, had vanished from the site after the invasion of Iraq.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 5:04 AM
2 Comments:
The implication of politicizing the missing explosives makes it really scary if Kerry wins the election. Obviously Bush was not checking for explosives when he was in Iraq last Thanksgiving but of course Kerry would have had personal knowledge. He would have directed the field generals to protect the munitions and perhaps redirct some of the combat efforts until he could send more troops.
It seems likely with a Kerry win, he will replace the whole general staff with field officers that he can direct from the oval office. Wait a minute - that sounds like the way Vietnam was run. That's right Kerry is a decorated Vietnam veteran so he will know exactly how to fight a proper war from the oval office. But then why did he disclaim that war - wait maybe he's changed his mind again.
Surprise. I agree with just about everything you say. Kerry will govern by committee, or at least take a month making a decision after talking with all. And Viet Nam, I am still mad at him for not being man enough to apologize for calling our troops there baby killers. And his subsequent trip to Paris to meet with Viet Cong leaders has not gotten the press it should have, given how Kerry made Viet Nam an issue at the Convention. So how will I vote. For Kerry, and with a sense that he may get us going in a different and better direction. Solve the deficit; both candidates are fibbing about this. It will take a couple of generations to undo Bush's work.
And as I love to say, those that don't like the way we can agree to disagree in this great country, can leave, and good riddance.
Post a Comment
<< Home