Article

2006-11-03 Iraq

Shocker: NYT To Confirm Iraqi Nuclear Weapons Program?

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by cajunbelle 2006-11-03 00:00|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Times just nuanced themselves right into a corner. Bwhahahahahaha

Posted by djohn66 2006-11-03 00:50|| 2006-11-03 00:50|| Front Page Top

#2 No surprise here - as for IRAN, more and more pundits are coming to believe that Iran is already a nuclear power ala [Chicom-controlled] NORTH KOREA, i.e. possesses nuclear bombs or a stockpile of tactical devices. Unlike NK, Tehran's bombs are controlled only by itself, not the Commies.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-11-03 01:30|| 2006-11-03 01:30|| Front Page Top

#3 I woke to this being reported on NBC at 4:30 (yuck!) this morning. Definitely being spun as a government screw up -- that a nuclear weapons documents site wasn't secured, and that the website was approved by George W. Bush personally, the assumption being that he compromised security while seeking efficiency. No mention that these were captured Iraqi documents released to the public eye. So I lay there in agony, hoping that this was deliberate trap, full of the kind of almost-correct information that results in serious work accidents...

Thank you so very much for posting this so quickly, cajunbelle. Now I can face the day with equinimaty.

Posted by trailing wife 2006-11-03 05:53|| 2006-11-03 05:53|| Front Page Top

#4 What a bunch of nimrods. But don't worry, as soon as someone starts to ask that question they will start screaming "Foley"!, "Foley"!

Posted by Anginens Ulique2459 2006-11-03 07:35|| 2006-11-03 07:35|| Front Page Top

#5 Mind you, the NYT can publish all the classified information it wants, but God forbid anything supporting the reasons for removing Saddam ever make the light of day.

Posted by Rob Crawford">Rob Crawford 2006-11-03 07:53|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2006-11-03 07:53|| Front Page Top

#6 Why is National Intelligence Director John Negraponte in Iraq today?

Posted by Jules 2006-11-03 08:14|| 2006-11-03 08:14|| Front Page Top

#7 i would think the russians where of more help too the iranian bomb than the US gov web site

Posted by sinse 2006-11-03 08:14|| 2006-11-03 08:14|| Front Page Top

#8 Many have correctly complained since before the war that the admin's articulation of the Iraq issue insufficiently emphasized the clear POTENTIAL WMD threat, and allowed the natural focus on purported existing stockpiles to become a very misleading reductionist version of the pre-emption rationale. Many of us agonized as the Prez and others failed to follow up on their good phrase about a "gathering threat" with an explicit elaboration of what that meant - nukes.

As with much else that is part of the notably stupid "debate" these days, an unserious approach to the public affairs dimension has left a landscape so devoid of understanding or logic that the NYT geniuses can even imagine (perhaps incorrectly, as y'all point out) that this is a "hit" on the admin.

On a related historic note: I was well distracted from the topic at the time, but does anyone remember that one of Clinton's dumbest appointees, a female SecEnergy, declassified and posted historic nuke design info on the theory that this display of openness would somehow mollify hostile nuke-seeking parties, or some such idiotic idea? I recall being literally unable to believe what I had been told about this. THAT was an unimaginably irresponsible and indefensible stunt - somehow I doubt the NYT objected, if they even noticed it.

Posted by Verlaine 2006-11-03 09:18|| 2006-11-03 09:18|| Front Page Top

#9 Not before the elections.

Posted by gromgoru 2006-11-03 10:04|| 2006-11-03 10:04|| Front Page Top

#10 "Iraqi documents captured during the war; detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research; a 'basic guide to building an atom bomb'..."

Does the date of the documents origin have any relevance? 80's...90's??? Just askin...I'm trying to anticipate the spin here. Something like; Yeah it was a WMD program...but you know...like from the old days...Rumsfield prolly sold it to em.

Posted by DepotGuy 2006-11-03 11:17|| 2006-11-03 11:17|| Front Page Top

#11 I hope someone had the good sense to make the critical "red wire/green wire" transpositions before putting it on the server.

So, you mullahs want to make a bomb, eh? Be my guest.

Posted by Baba Tutu 2006-11-03 14:13|| 2006-11-03 14:13|| Front Page Top

#12 DepotGuy: that's what they're spinning on the subject over at crapdot. Down to the Rummy part.

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2006-11-03 17:52|| 2006-11-03 17:52|| Front Page Top

13:49 military men as dumb, stupid animals
23:59 anon1
23:56 anon1
23:53 anon1
23:50 anon1
23:48 anon1
23:48 JosephMendiola
23:43 DMFD
23:39 Lancasters Over Dresden
23:35 Lancasters Over Dresden
23:28 Lancasters Over Dresden
23:25 Lancasters Over Dresden
23:14 3dc
23:10 Zenster
22:46 Thinemp Whimble2412
22:41 Lanny Ddub
22:35 Thinemp Whimble2412
22:35 .com
22:34 .com
22:28 Thinemp Whimble2412
22:26 Hupeaper Slarong5013
22:24 trailing wife
22:22 trailing wife
22:17 .com