U.S. Removes 550 Tons of Nuclear Precursor from Iraq -Carter Andress[I]n a significant development on weapons of mass destruction (WMD) inexplicably not well-covered by the media - the U.S. military removed from Iraq 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium, a necessary precursor to the development of nuclear weapons. With this radioactive material, all that was needed to create up to 140 nuclear bombs was the centrifuge equipment.
(Washington Times)
5 comments:
No conspiracy by the liberal press here. Easy to find on the internet and I will be pasting a quote here from CNN back in July. The reason it was not big news is, if you read articles by real news sources, and not Conservative Hack Tabloids like the Washington Times, you will find that Saddam Hussein having yellow cake uranium is much less dangerous than Iran having intelligence from Pakistani or North Korean nuclear scientists. In the case of Iraq, as one Pentagon official was quoted by CNN: "yellowcake uranium is a commonly traded commodity used for nuclear power generation. It is not enriched and cannot be used without first going through a complicated enrichment process, he said, but because of the unstable nature of Iraq, the United States and the Iraqi government decided it should be moved out of that country. Iraq has no nuclear power generating plants." This may be a case of Saddam the dreamer putting the cart before the horse. He had the oil money to make some purchases. He would have done well, if he really wanted nuclear weapons, to get plans and centrifuges before he worried about raw materials. Because he probably found, especially back then, that those were much harder to get, hence the un-enriched yellow cake Uranium sitting around.
I should have mentioned that 2 days before the CNN story, back on July 5th, this was on the FOX NEWS website.
True that the uranium was low grade...and, of course, raw materials are not really WMD's.
However, i found it interesting that it got buried.
Even i, a midEast news junkie, didn't catch this.
As i posted this, i anticipated your reply and counted on you to keep this post balanced [as i don't often comment on the material i post]. The hint that i was skeptical was the question mark [?] i placed in my title.
That's so disturbing.
I did indeed catch the question mark. It is just that the Washington Times is so biased, they are the one source that FOX NEWS points to, to show how Fair and Balanced FOX is!!
This did appear in some well known sources, it is just not really much of a News Story, and did not mean much. If it did you would have heard about it from W. Bush and Cheney. You didn't because they knew they would ridiculed.
Post a Comment