380 Tons of Explosives Missing from Iraq

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/al_qa_qaa.htm

I shouldn't need to remind you that Pan Am flight 103 was taken down with just over 300 grams of RDX and PETN.

Powdered RDX won't work by itself. It's almost like a binary type explosive. You need to mix it with something to give it substance, like filler. It's hard to explain to someone that doesn't understand the makeup of artillery propellant, not the warhead, but the propellant.
Click to expand...
Yes, thats where the PETN comes in. With RDX and PETN, you can make Semtex. Semtex is a highly stable and highly effective plastic explosive. Its one of the easiest to use and easiest to produce, given you have RDX and PETN. Show me a Walmart that carrys that.

You're trying to argue that RDX is easy to produce. Even if they had the capability to make it, I don't think they could make hundreds of tons of it. RDX has already been detected in car bombings in Iraq. The failure to secure this site has directly led to the deaths of American soldiers.
 
What does David Kay, former weapons inspector, say about these latest developments?

"That's either HMX or RDX," Kay said, referring to the types of explosives. "I don't know of anything else in Al-Qaqaa that was in that form." The explosives -- considered powerful enough to demolish buildings or detonate nuclear warheads -- were reported missing from the Al-Qaqaa depot in a letter this month from the interim Iraqi government to the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency.

The Iraqi letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency, dated October 10, blamed the theft and looting of government installations on a "lack of security" during the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/28/iraq.explosives/index.html
 
The explosives -- considered powerful enough to demolish buildings or detonate nuclear warheads -- were reported missing from the Al-Qaqaa depot in a letter this month from the interim Iraqi government to the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency.

The Iraqi letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency, dated October 10, blamed the theft and looting of government installations on a "lack of security" during the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
Click to expand...
There goes the argument that the U.N. deliberately did this as an October Surprise.
 
You can get PETN from det cord which isn't hard to get but isn't available at Wal Mart. From that you can combine it with RTX to make semtex.

There isn't a known terrorist group on the planet of note that doesn't have bomb makers capable of mixing and making all of this stuff. If I can go on the internet and give you recepies for any explosive substance known to man how widespread do you think this stuff is?

There is still little firm evidence that this site was looted and pilfered after the American invasion so the point is moot. However any guerilla group worth their salt has people that can make it from scratch through the raw ingredients.
 
Any guerilla group can make 100 tons of each? Either within Iraq, or smuggled in through the borders, which we also have not secured?

There is still little firm evidence that this site was looted and pilfered after the American invasion so the point is moot. However any guerilla group worth their salt has people that can make it from scratch through the raw ingredients.
Click to expand...
And there are no Americans in Baghdad.

cnn-mss.sm.jpg
 
100 tons? Where are you pulling that number from?

The amount in question was 380 tons. This has fallen in some reports to as little as 3 tons.

Listen, it would take 100 men working 12 hour days with 40 dumptrucks 10 days to clear this out. If they were able to do it along a road which we controlled that was being travelled by the 3rd infantry division and the 101st airborne? Yeah, someone's head should roll.

You really.... I mean REALLY honestly believe that what I described went on in front of American forces? Contrary to popular belief you can't drive trucks willy nilly all over the desert, the consistency of the sand in Iraq and any other world desert is such that you could be driving and WHOOSH, you've fallen into a soft sand pit and dropped 50 feet and will likely suffocate. That's why they build roads even in the middle of nowhere through the desert.

That's why I find the basis of this argument so utterly unbelieveable and that the material was removed before the war. Did Russian Spetsnaz forces do it? You know, the Russian special forces theory? Who knows. It's more credible than 100 men working 12 hour days with 40 dumptrucks unhindered by American forces.

I do know one If John Kerry wins election Tuesday this story will never be heard from again and no one that posted in this thread will care.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']That's why I find the basis of this argument so utterly unbelieveable and that the material was removed before the war. Did Russian Spetsnaz forces do it? You know, the Russian special forces theory? Who knows. It's more credible than 100 men working 12 hour days with 40 dumptrucks unhindered by American forces.
[/quote]

Are you forgetting (or just ignoring) the news footage of the explosives at al Qaqaa after the US invasion?
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Listen, it would take 100 men working 12 hour days with 40 dumptrucks 10 days to clear this out. If they were able to do it along a road which we controlled that was being travelled by the 3rd infantry division and the 101st airborne? Yeah, someone's head should roll.[/quote]

You know how rock erodes, PAD? Water relentlessly rubs against it, taking away a little at a time over an extended period.

You know how those explosives probably disappeared? Hundreds of Iraqis, returning again and again to an unguarded facility, taking away a little at a time over an extended period.
 
The amount in question was 380 tons. This has fallen in some reports to as little as 3 tons.
Click to expand...
I have not seen it below 350 tons from any news source. Please show me where you have seen as little as 3 tons, because the U.N. says otherwise.

100 tons? Where are you pulling that number from?
Click to expand...
~190 tons of RDX
~140 tons of HDX
~10 tons of PETN

I'll ask you again. A guerilla group can make 200 tons of RDX, or 150 tons of HDX? Impressive. If only it were possible.
I would say that it would be impossible for a guerilla group in Iraq to make even one ton. Are you aware of how much a ton is? Thats 2000 lbs. How much did it take to blow up Flight 103? Less than a pound.

That's why I find the basis of this argument so utterly unbelieveable and that the material was removed before the war. Did Russian Spetsnaz forces do it? You know, the Russian special forces theory? Who knows. It's more credible than 100 men working 12 hour days with 40 dumptrucks unhindered by American forces.
Click to expand...
The Russian theory is so laughable that even Cheney is discrediting it. The story in the Washington Times (a joke in itself of a newspaper) was openly ridiculed on CNN.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/27/iraq.explosives/index.html

But David Kay, former chief of the Iraq Survey Group, the joint CIA-Pentagon task force charged with locating Saddam's suspected weapons programs, said the Pentagon had underestimated the capability of Iraqi looters, who he said could dismantle buildings without heavy equipment.

"I find it hard to believe that a convoy of 40 to 60 trucks left that facility prior to or during the war and we didn't spot it on satellite or UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle]," said Kay, who also was a U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq during the 1990s.

"That was because it is the main road to Baghdad from the south. It was a road that was constantly under surveillance. I also don't find it hard to believe that looters could carry it off in the dead of night or during the day and not use the road network," Kay said in a CNN interview.
Click to expand...
 
In Friday's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/p...age&adxnnlx=1099062644-8C8jGiZYclrWARAu+Nmtjg

Video Shows G.I.'s at Weapon Cache
By WILLIAM J. BROAD and DAVID E. SANGER

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.

The question of whether the material was removed by Mr. Hussein's forces in the days before the invasion, or looted later because it was unguarded, has become a heated dispute on the campaign trail, with Senator John Kerry accusing President Bush of incompetence, and Mr. Bush saying it is unclear when the material disappeared and rejecting what he calls Mr. Kerry's "wild charges."

Weapons experts familiar with the work of the international inspectors in Iraq say the videotape appears identical to photographs that the inspectors took of the explosives, which were put under seal before the war. One frame shows what the experts say is a seal, with narrow wires that would have to be broken if anyone entered through the main door of the bunker.

The agency said that when it left Iraq in mid-March, only days before the war began, the only bunkers bearing its seals at the huge complex contained the explosive known as HMX, which the agency had monitored because it could be used in a nuclear weapons program. It is now clear that program had ground to a halt.

The New York Times and CBS reported on Monday that Iraqi officials had told the agency earlier this month that the explosives were missing, and that they were looted after April 9, 2003, the day Baghdad fell.
 
[quote name='dennis_t']You know how rock erodes, PAD? Water relentlessly rubs against it, taking away a little at a time over an extended period.

You know how those explosives probably disappeared? Hundreds of Iraqis, returning again and again to an unguarded facility, taking away a little at a time over an extended period.[/quote]

380 tons equals 760,000 lbs.

Let's assume you're right. 100% right.

Average male can carry less than 50 lbs at any distance or note. Fully loaded airborne troops carry about 70 lbs of equipment.

Okay, that established.... 760,000 lbs divided by 50 equals 15,200 loads/people.

Let's say these 15,200 loads were place over the last 15 months.

Now, this place is also in the middle of nowhere so they probably used cars or trucks.

1,000 loads a month, assuming from invasion until the NY Times story....

33 people daily carrying out loads uninterrupted, unhindered, never stopped, never investigated.

Bullshit. Pure bullshit.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark'][quote name='dennis_t']You know how rock erodes, PAD? Water relentlessly rubs against it, taking away a little at a time over an extended period.

You know how those explosives probably disappeared? Hundreds of Iraqis, returning again and again to an unguarded facility, taking away a little at a time over an extended period.[/quote]

380 tons equals 760,000 lbs.

Let's assume you're right. 100% right.

Average male can carry less than 50 lbs at any distance or note. Fully loaded airborne troops carry about 70 lbs of equipment.

Okay, that established.... 760,000 lbs divided by 50 equals 15,200 loads/people.

Let's say these 15,200 loads were place over the last 15 months.

Now, this place is also in the middle of nowhere so they probably used cars or trucks.

1,000 loads a month, assuming from invasion until the NY Times story....

33 people daily carrying out loads uninterrupted, unhindered, never stopped, never investigated.

Bullshit. Pure bullshit.[/quote]

So what happened to the explosives then? Personally I don't care whether it was 380 tons or only 1 ton. It was there after we invaded and now it isn't. Bush made guarding the oil ministry more of a priority than guarding explosives, explosives that are now in the hands of insurgents who are using it to kill and maim US forces. Bush's behavior and refusal to take any responsibility is inexcusable.
 
How should I know? I'm a lowly internet poster.

I know that the theories being posited by Bush haters that need/want this to be true are bullshit. It doesn't add up.

You're seeing photographs of material that is not RDX/HDX. The debate is over that, not black powder. It is completely open to debate what happened to the key material in question. One thing for sure is the New York Times has not provided dates for anything in this "story". They basically came out and said there was stuff there, now its not.

Well golly gee. By that same reasoning I'm going to tell you that at one point there were 30 tons of high explosives at Fort Pitt and now there aren't 30 tons. It must be Bush's fault! Nevermind that Fort Pitt hasn't existed in 180 years dammit..... those explosives were once there and now they aren't. That's the gaping holes the NYT has left in their reporting. Facts, without dates.

Why should Bush take responsiblity for this stuff? How do you, he or anyone know if it was even there post-invasion? Why should he apologize? I know you desperately want the story to be there were 380 tons of explosives there, that 2 army divisions, the CIA, DIA, DOD, countless analysts, and tens of thousands of foot/ground soldiers from colonel to private fucked up beyond belief and now this stuff is killing them... but it's too unlikely.

How do you know any of this stuff is being used by insurgents? How do you know it wasn't spirited away in a convoy that dumped it and other countless materials in Syria?

You don't know, I don't know.

The bottom line is the systematic amount of fuck ups that would have had to take place for this to have happened is mind boggling. The army is very inefficent at times but it is not incompetent or blind to reality on the ground which it would have had to be for all of this to be true.

Sorry, this one doesn't fly.
 
33 people going there once a day, every day to get 50lbs each of explosives does not sound implausible. These Iraqis are resourceful people. How many cars or light trucks would it take to move 1600lbs per day?

Keep in mind that this is a large sprawling campus of many buildings, and completely unguarded. The road to the south to Baghdad was monitored and patrolled, but they would know how to avoid checkpoints. You would not have to go very far to find insurgents which could further distribute and move the stuff.
 
I'm really done arguing with this. I'm beginning to repeat myself.

I know no one's mind is going to change despite my statements so I'm walking away.
 
PAD, you are like the Iraqi information minister. Only less likable. Don't let silly obstacles like facts or photographs get in your way.

Have you read the Times article?

[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']You're seeing photographs of material that is not RDX/HDX.[/quote]
"They visited a half dozen bunkers, he said. The gloomy interiors revealed long rows of boxes, crates and barrels, what independent experts said were three kinds of HMX containers shipped to Iraq from France, China and Yugoslavia."

"The team opened storage containers, some of which contained white powder that independent experts said was consistent with HMX."


[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Facts, without dates. [/quote]
"In the interview, Mr. Caffrey said he had carefully rechecked the date on the cassette for his camera, adding that he was sure it was April 18, 2003."

"Yesterday Mohamed al-Sharaa, director of the national monitoring directorate at the Iraq Ministry of Science and Technology, explained for the first time why Iraqi officials had specified in their letter to the United Nations agency that the explosives had been looted after April 9, 2003. "We have some witnesses," Mr. Sharaa said outside his office at the ministry. "They say that the materials," he added, were "in this site after April 9."

I know no one's mind is going to change despite my statements so I'm walking away.
Click to expand...
You can't win this argument because you're 100% wrong. Go ahead and cut and run like you always do when you're wrong.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I'm really done arguing with this. I'm beginning to repeat myself.

I know no one's mind is going to change despite my statements so I'm walking away.[/quote]

I love it when, confronted with irrefutable fact, PAD does the equivalent of cupping his hands over his ears and shouting "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

Especially when that's the only tactic he can use to maintain his support of a failed leader who has put us in harm's way through negligence.
 
Regarding the news conference at the Pentagon, they are claiming that there were only 3 tons of RDX at Al Qaqaa. That in itself is true, but misleading. 3 tons were at the main facility, and 125 tons were at a subsidiary storage site.

"Three tonnes were stocked at Al-Qaqaa itself and 125 tonnes at a subsidiary storage site at Al-Mawaheel, part of the Al-Qaqaa complex."

They are also saying that some of it was destroyed by the Army, but the amount they're describing includes conventional weapons and bombs, not just the materials in question. Al Qaqaa had many more conventional kinds of explosives in addition to the RDX/HMX. In any case, the total amount that they hauled away and destroyed including conventional weapons is less than the total of RDX/HMX/PETN.

They can't even say that *any* of what they removed was the high explosives in question.
 
Hell, the Pentagon conference is funny, as I sit here and type...

200+ tons were pulled out by this major and his troops, 400,000 tons of explosives were destroyed to date in Iraq. I'm going to wait and read more of the summary and backgroud before I again tell you all.... again.... you're wrong.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Hell, the Pentagon conference is funny, as I sit here and type...

200+ tons were pulled out by this major and his troops, 400,000 tons of explosives were destroyed to date in Iraq. I'm going to wait and read more of the summary and backgroud before I again tell you all.... again.... you're wrong.[/quote]

Oh, you're still here? I thought you'd picked up your ball and went home.
 
200+ tons were pulled out by this major and his troops, 400,000 tons of explosives were destroyed to date in Iraq. I'm going to wait and read more of the summary and backgroud before I again tell you all.... again.... you're wrong.
Click to expand...
Scroll up. That doesn't refer specificly to high explosives. He can't even say if he pulled out any high explosives at all, and he's supposedly a weapons expert. He even said that there are bunkers that they didnt even open or look at, and that the facility was not secured upon his arrival.

From what he said, his top priority for destruction were not the most dangerous weapons, but the explosives that are the most dangerous to their personal safety at the time, i.e. weapons that are unstable and could explode. These high explosives are extremely stable, so they would not be a priority. Even if all of what he pulled were the high explosives, that still leaves almost 100 tons. But its doubtful that he pulled out any at all.

Not to say anything bad about the Major, he did his job as he was instructed.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']33 people going there once a day, every day to get 50lbs each of explosives does not sound implausible. These Iraqis are resourceful people. How many cars or light trucks would it take to move 1600lbs per day?

Keep in mind that this is a large sprawling campus of many buildings, and completely unguarded. The road to the south to Baghdad was monitored and patrolled, but they would know how to avoid checkpoints. You would not have to go very far to find insurgents which could further distribute and move the stuff.[/quote]

They could have used camels. How much can a camel carry?
 
I dunno, but they use them in packs. Thats the thing with us being there, we don't have experience in that area so we probably wouldn't even think to stop a bunch of camels if we found them going anywhere.

I think pickup trucks/cars are more likely though. The area was not secured at all, you could drive in and out at will.
 
Hey Ruined, have you paid attention at all? Have you scrolled up? Or do you believe what you want to believe, truth be damned?

They removed 200 tons of munitions, that includes conventional weapons, which was what the compount mostly had. The Major could not even say if he removed any high explosives at all. Many bunkers were not inspected or even opened after he was done. The 400,000 destroyed includes all kinds of munitions. What we're concerned about is high explosives.
 
[quote name='Ruined']http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137017,00.html

lol, Looks like egg on the face of the NYT, CBS, and Kerry yet again :)

btw, to put these 300 tons in perspective, we've captured/destroyed 400,000 tons of weapons in iraq to date.[/quote]

Does it seem strange to anyone else that this major had to come forward to explain this? Doesn't the Pentagon have any idea what the soldiers are doing over there? The White House knew about the missing explosives a long time ago. Why has it taken this long to find out where they went if US forces cleared them out? Also, what happened to the explosives? The story doesn't state whether they were destroyed or not. Are there any records of us destroying 250 tons of explosives?

This article poses more questions than it answers.
 
Foxnews is the antichrist. Here's why:

666 is the number of the antichrist

Breaking the alphabet up like this:

A B C D E F G H I
J K L M N O P Q R
S T U V W X Y Z

The sixth letter in each line spells F-O-X. :lol:

(Saw this on the "internets" somewhere)
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']Foxnews is the antichrist. Here's why:

666 is the number of the antichrist

Breaking the alphabet up like this:

A B C D E F G H I
J K L M N O P Q R
S T U V W X Y Z

The sixth letter in each line spells F-O-X. :lol:

(Saw this on the "internets" somewhere)[/quote]

:twisted:
 
QUITE REMOVED-CR



Wow, it's been a long time since I saw anything from the Anarchist's Textbook. I'm surprised this is still available on the internet considering the content. Unfortunately, some of the most powerful explosives available can be quite easily made. This is where the next threat to America will come into play. It only takes one person to make a bomb or produce some type of poisonous gas with materials available at Wal-Mart, Ag-Way, etc.
 
Wow, it's been a long time since I saw anything from the Anarchist's Textbook. I'm surprised this is still available on the internet considering the content. Unfortunately, some of the most powerful explosives available can be quite easily made. This is where the next threat to America will come into play. It only takes one person to make a bomb or produce some type of poisonous gas with materials available at Wal-Mart, Ag-Way, etc.
Click to expand...
Umm... Tim McVeigh? Have we forgotten already?

It should be noted that the main concern of the IAEA is HMX, which can be used to detonate nukes, and not RDX, but its still dangerous and in larger quantities than any terrorist has dreamed of.
 
QUOTE REMOVED-CR


Technically, couldn't PAD get in trouble for posting something like that and having the AC before? I am just wondering because it seems kind of a bad idea to put a recipe for an explosive on a game site.

And WOW you guys are tearing PAD apart. Good job.
 
I agree with MorbidAngel4Life that the excerpt from the AC should have not been posted. These chemicals should NOT be handled by someone who doesn't know what they are doing. Concentrated nitric acid is some nasty sh(t, to say the least! I am assuming that they are doing some sort of nitration reaction here based on the conditions and comment about "dire consequences could result" if the reaction mixture is not kept below a certain temperature. Dire consequences would be that the reaction goes out of control, suddenly becomes very hot, and foams out of the container and onto everything nearby.

Why am I bothering to post this information? I am a chemist and don't want some kid who doesn't know what they are doing to get ahold of some of these chemicals and seriously hurt themselves.
 
[quote name='daria19']I agree with MorbidAngel4Life that the excerpt from the AC should have not been posted. These chemicals should NOT be handled by someone who doesn't know what they are doing. Concentrated nitric acid is some nasty sh(t, to say the least! I am assuming that they are doing some sort of nitration reaction here based on the conditions and comment about "dire consequences could result" if the reaction mixture is not kept below a certain temperature. Dire consequences would be that the reaction goes out of control, suddenly becomes very hot, and foams out of the container and onto everything nearby.

Why am I bothering to post this information? I am a chemist and don't want some kid who doesn't know what they are doing to get ahold of some of these chemicals and seriously hurt themselves.[/quote]

Thank you for agreeing with me. Teh qoutes of what he posted were removed. were removed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top