Timeline on Missing Explosives in Iraq

[RedEarth]

October 25, 2004, 3:35 PM EDT

_ 1991: The International Atomic Energy Agency placed a seal over storage bunkers holding conventional explosives known as HMX and RDX at the Al-Qaqaa facility south of Baghdad as part of U.N. sanctions that ordered the dismantlement of Iraq's nuclear program after the Gulf War. HMX is a "dual use" substance powerful enough to ignite the fissile material in an atomic bomb and set off a nuclear chain reaction.

* January 2003: IAEA inspectors viewed the explosives at Al-Qaqaa for the last time. The inspectors took an inventory and again placed storage bunkers at Al-Qaqaa under agency seal.

* February 2003: IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei told the United Nations that Iraq had declared that "HMX previously under IAEA seal had been transferred for use in the production of industrial explosives." This apparently did not include the HMX that remained under seal at Al-Qaqaa.

* March 2003: Nuclear agency inspectors visited Al-Qaqaa for the last time but did not examine the explosives because the seals were not broken. The inspectors then pulled out of the country.

* March 2003: The U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-nuclear-agency-iraq-timeline,0,846674,print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

[kwyjibo]

1. did not examine the explosives because the seals were not broken...

but, they were definitely there?

At what point was the US considered in control of Iraq? When should we have been expected to be guarding the facility?

[joefree1]

3. Biggest question of all!

Why did Bushco not know about the missing tons until now?

WTF have they been doing all this time? The UN warned them long ago.

[Career Prole]

5. A common sense plan would have made it top priority but as you know

the only "plan" bushco formulated involved guarding oil wells.

"At what point was the US considered in control of Iraq?"
The day we broke it.

[sandnsea]

6. The oil ministries & pipelines

When did we send in Special Ops to guard the oil? BEFORE the invasion, that's when. When should this stuff have been protected? BEFORE the invasion.

[tridim]

2. Wow..

It's as clear as crystal that Bush's war of choice is to blame. This should never have been allowed to happen and the Bush admin should be officially blamed and charged now, election or not.

[progressivebydesign]

4. ON another thread, Pentagon claims they were GONE when we got there!

That's unbelievable how they're lying! Now the Bushies are trying to claim they weren't there when we arrived, so we're not responsible. Gosh.. earlier today, The Bush camp said that we should focus on the "406 tons that did NOT disappear".

[DoYouEverWonder]

8. So with all that high tech surveillance that we had over Iraq 24/7

We didn't see lot's of trucks loading and leaving a site we knew continued tons of high explosives, during the three weeks before we invaded? I don't think so.

[havocmom]

9. Yeah, at least 17 semi trucks is what one DUer figured

it would take to move that amount of the stuff. Either we are NOT getting our monies worth for the spy satellites or DOD wanted the explosives to go unaccounted for.

Are we safer than we were four years ago? No and we have bush*/Cheney and the neocon war profiteers to thank for it. Get that message out to every editorial page of every newspaper in America.

[mom cat]

10. And of cource we could not possibly notice 17 semis with our satelites!

And just who had 17 semis around to take the stuff? And how could they do that in the middle of a war?

[havocmom]

11. makes ya go 'hmmmmmm' doesn't it

Well, at least the folks that make $$ from war are safer. Too bad about our troops and the rest of the world </sarcasm>

[grytpype]

7. Wow, there is a big gap in the timeline...

* March 2003: The U.S.-led coalition invaded Iraq.

* After the invasion: The Pentagon said Monday that "coalition forces were present in the vicinity at various times during and after major combat operations. The forces searched 32 bunkers and 87 other buildings at the facility, but found no indicators of WMD (weapons of mass destruction). While some explosive material was discovered, none of it carried IAEA seals.

* Oct. 10, 2004: Iraq's Ministry of Science and Technology told the nuclear agency that 377 tons of explosives had disappeared from the Al-Qaqaa facility. The Iraqis said the materials were stolen and looted because of a lack of security.


???? So when did the Idiot King's ministers first learn that the explosives were gone ???? Not as late as October 20, 2004, I'll bet!

[Ronbrynaert]

12. Perhaps it's not insurgents who jacked the explosives

This link (www.robert-fisk.com/articles232.htm) is to an article written by Robert Fisk from Baghdad on April 17, 2003 entitled "For the people on the streets, this is not liberation but a new colonial oppression." Perhaps it's not insurgents who jacked the explosives:

<em>Because there is also something dangerous – and deeply disturbing – about the crowds setting light to the buildings of Baghdad, including the great libraries and state archives. For they are not looters. The looters come first. The arsonists turn up later, often in blue-and-white buses. I followed one after its passengers had set the Ministry of Trade on fire and it sped out of town.

The official US line on all this is that the looting is revenge – an explanation that is growing very thin – and that the fires are started by "remnants of Saddam's regime", the same "criminal elements", no doubt, who feature in the marines' curfew orders. But people in Baghdad don't believe Saddam's former supporters are starting these fires. And neither do I.

The looters make money from their rampages but the arsonists have to be paid. The passengers in those buses are clearly being directed to their targets. If Saddam had pre-paid them, they wouldn't start the fires. The moment he disappeared, they would have pocketed the money and forgotten the whole project.

So who are they, this army of arsonists? I recognised one the other day, a middle-aged, unshaven man in a red T-shirt, and the second time he saw me he pointed a Kalashnikov at me. What was he frightened of? Who was he working for? In whose interest is it to destroy the entire physical infrastructure of the state, with its cultural heritage? Why didn't the Americans stop this?</em>

http://www.whyareweback.blogspot.com - Why Are We Back In Iraq?

[DeepModem Mom]

13. kick