Weapons inspection

[Hey Ladi]

So the news just said something about the weapons inspection in Iraq. Is this for real? Do they think it will be out in plain site? Won't Iraq hide their nucelar weapons, since everyone is talking about it?

What kind of places do the inspectors look? :clueless:

[krahzee]

What kind of places do the inspectors look?

Anywhere and everywhere. Remember this:

Just because they don't trip over a bomb doesn't mean they can't prove there wasn't one there. I would imagine they are probably using forensic tools to detect traces of whatever elements are in these bombs. As well as forensic work intoshipping records, ect...

[Hey Ladi]

how sophisticated are their searching techinques? is Iraq not that tricky? Do you think the inspectors will find what they want?

[krahzee]

I saw a show on this ( I believe it was on TechTv) where they showed how far along the detection equipment for the components they are looking for have come. What used to be large and bulky machines are now hand held devices that give better results.

As far as finding anything? They probably will. The question is what. They may just find traces of the compounds used in abandoned factorys or factorys converted back to thier original use.

Iraq tends to build thier bombs in locations masked as something other than a bomb factory. For example, I think we once blew up a factory we thought was making bombs and Iraq claimed we hit a baby formula plant.

The other problem is is the UN going to be allowed to search Saddam's private palaces. These places are often acres upon acres large and there are about a dozen or more of them. The last time the inspectors were allowed in they were not allowed to search his residences. That might be the X-Factor in if the UN finds weapons or not.

[fbd]

saddam wouldnt build a weapons facility and claim it was a chocolate chip factory. he would make a chocolate chip factory and make weapons there

[Hybrid]

have my manbabies fbd. please. :lol:

[PollyannaFlower46]

I'm sure they'll find something, but I'm thinking it won't be tomorrow....I'm just wondering when and what it will be....only time will tell. Only thing that sucks is depending what is found, Saddam might claim that it was planted.

[HedCold]

on the daily show a while ago they had some guy from the weapons inspections last time and he explained what they do. i don't remember it fully, but they ask to see all of iraqs plans and look to see what kind of buildings have been put up and they go checking what kind of supplies they've been buying. they also check factories and stuff like that.
it also got more indepth than all that

[Arthur Dent]

I'm disappointed. When I saw Ladi posted this, I expected it to be an instructional on how women should inspect their men's penis's...peni...whatever the plural is.

[HollywoodJewMoses]

what?

[Peachy]

how sophisticated are their searching techinques?

They walk around a spot while an Iraqi yells "Cold...cold...ooh! freezing...Antarctica...oh, warm...warmer...warmer...hot...hot! Hell's afire! Ding-ding-ding! You found one!" :firebounce:

[The Jays]

... no matter what, we're gonna attack him...

[Hey Ladi]

"Cold...cold...ooh! freezing

:rofl:

... no matter what, we're gonna attack him...

I know! so why do we have to go all thru this?

wouldn't it be easier if they just looked for them after, why keep everyone waiting. things should be simpiler (sp) to save time. :thumbs-up:

[The Jays]

I know! so why do we have to go all thru this?

I dunno... it's not like the US actually likes an anti-semitic organization such as the UN....

[Hey Ladi]

it's not like the US actually likes an anti-semitic organization such as the UN....

huh?

[The Jays]

I don't know why we are going along with the rules of an organzation thats hates us and our allies.......

[JerseyThunder]

I don't know why we are going along with the rules of an organzation thats hates us and our allies.......

So we (THE U.S.) looks better on the world stage.

I found this on the NY times website:

U.S. Taking Steps to Lay Foundation for Action in Iraq
Mon Nov 18, 8:56 AM ET


By JAMES DAO and ERIC SCHMITT The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Nov. 17 The Bush administration is initiating a series of diplomatic and military steps that must be completed before the United States could go to war in Iraq, American and allied officials say.


The tasks, some of which could take weeks or even months to carry out, include formalizing allies' roles in any offensive, discouraging neighboring countries like Turkey and Israel from taking their own action, and deciding whether to seek United Nations support for an attack. Failure to accomplish many of these objectives could delay or complicate the onset of war.


The administration is moving urgently to accomplish its objectives, even before the start of the weapons inspections ordered by the United Nations. One goal is to create a credible threat of force, which might pressure President Saddam Hussein of Iraq to comply with the new resolution of the United Nations Security Council. The other main reason for acting speedily is to be ready for combat in Iraq before the hot weather sets in there next year.


There has already been some progress, officials said.


American officials have privately secured informal assurances of basing and overflight rights in several Central Asian and Persian Gulf countries, including Kuwait and Qatar, but those commitments need to be formalized. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is expected to consult with allies this week at the NATO summit meeting in Prague on how they might fill in for American forces now in Europe and the United States that would be moved to the gulf area.


The United States has stockpiled tanks and heavy equipment for more than 30,000 troops in several gulf states and on ships nearby. But additional heavy equipment for Marine or Army divisions would take three to four weeks to reach the Persian Gulf from ports like Beaumont, Tex., or Savannah, Ga.


American diplomats have intensified talks with two important allies, Turkey and Israel, to persuade them to remain on the sidelines during an invasion. Quietly, often through informal channels, Washington has also broached discussions with Iran about preventing Iraq's Shiite majority from trying to seize control of Baghdad or form a separate state if Mr. Hussein falls.


If Mr. Hussein defies or obstructs weapons inspectors, the Bush administration will have to decide whether to seek approval from the Security Council for a military strike. Administration officials say President Bush would like Council support, provided it can be obtained quickly. Diplomacy to lay the groundwork for winning that swift passage is in the most preliminary stages.


Senior military officials say the portion of a total force of about 250,000 troops needed to begin the "rolling start" of an air, land and sea attack could be in place within 30 days of Mr. Bush's order.


"We're making preparations every day," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz said on Friday. "I don't want to start saying exactly when we're at peak readiness, but it would be a terrible mistake for anyone to underestimate our ability to act if needed."


The timing of any offensive, however, hinges greatly on the outcome of the weapons inspections. "A lot depends on how things come out with the U.N. resolutions," said one senior military official.

But the administration has already begun laying the groundwork with dozens of countries for a possible attack. In a flurry of recent meetings and telephone conversations, some in Washington and some overseas, American officials have asked for assistance from allies and antagonists and received demands in exchange for their cooperation.

Turkey, which has several bases that would be critical for American troops and aircraft driving into northern Iraq, has received some of the most serious attention. In the past two weeks, Marc Grossman, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, and John E. McLaughlin, the deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency visited Ankara, while the new Turkish chief of staff, Gen. Hilmi Ozkok, met with officials in the Pentagon and State Department.

Turkey wants assurances from Washington that independence-minded Kurdish factions in northern Iraq will not attempt to form a separate state, a move that it fears could incite Kurdish separatists in its own country. Turkey has more than 3,000 troops in northern Iraq and could take steps to counter any efforts by Kurds there to seize territory. To ease Ankara's concerns, the Pentagon is preparing war plans to dispatch troops to protect the oil fields around Kirkuk in northern Iraq.

At Ankara's behest, Washington is also pushing European countries to accept Turkey into the European Union. Turkey, a major trading partner with Iraq, is also seeking compensation for economic losses that might result from war. Negotiations are under way for a multibillion-dollar aid package that would include forgiving Turkish debts, and military aid and grants, diplomats said.

"Should a crisis come because of Iraq's defiance, we will work to ensure that the safety net under Turkey's economy stays in place," W. Robert Pearson, the American ambassador to Turkey, said in a statement.

The Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, has vowed to retaliate if Mr. Hussein launches missiles at Israel, a move that could swiftly undermine the support of moderate Arab states for an American invasion, perhaps igniting a broader war.

To allay Israel's concerns, Mr. Bush has approved a war plan that calls for American forces to seize land in western Iraq to destroy Scud missiles that could reach Israeli cities. Also, American diplomats are urging Israel to limit any responses to Iraqi aggression to purely defensive actions, such as firing Arrow antimissile weapons.

In turn, Israel, during a meeting between its national security adviser and senior Pentagon and State Department officials last Thursday, urged the United States to help resolve a water dispute with Lebanon and Syria, officials said.

The administration has quietly reached out to Iran, often through third parties, to enlist Tehran's support in discouraging Iraqi Shiites, who represent 60 percent of Iraq's population, from engaging in terrorism or forming a breakaway republic, officials said. Those channels include the Swiss Embassy in Tehran, which represents American interests in Iran, various relief groups, the United Nations and a Tehran-based Iraqi Shiite opposition group, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

In exchange for cooperation, Iran wants the United States to release billions of dollars in assets frozen in American financial institutions after American Embassy workers were taken hostage in 1979. It is also seeking pledges of assistance for Iraqi refugees who might pour into Iran if war breaks out.

In one sign that Tehran was trying to reach out to Washington, Javad Zarif, Iran's ambassador to the United Nations, requested permission to visit Washington this week to meet with members of Congress. But the State Department, which must approve his travel plans beyond New York, would not allow him to stay overnight, and he canceled the trip.

"I think sooner or later we will have better relations with Iran," Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said on Friday. "We stay in touch with people who might be on the same side of this as us, but I don't want to give the impression there is a great rapprochement about to take place with respect to Iran."

The diplomatic talks are closely linked to troop deployments.

American diplomats and senior military officials including Gen. Tommy R. Franks, commander of American forces in the Persian Gulf area have fanned out across Europe and Southwest Asia in recent weeks to discuss basing agreements for American troops and aircraft, and to determine which nations may contribute forces or equipment to an offensive to disarm Iraq.

General Franks said in a recent interview that the United States had not yet made formal requests for assistance. But several countries have given private assurances to provide troops, equipment, basing, supplies and other support for a war, officials said. Saudi Arabia, the most important gulf ally in the 1991 war, has given conflicting signals on whether it would allow the military to use a major air operations center outside Riyadh or its spacious air bases for another war against Iraq.

General Franks has set up an alternate command post in Qatar, and other countries, from Kuwait to Oman, could pick up the slack if the Saudis restrict their bases.

"We'll have the access we need wherever we need it to do our job," said Gen. Charles F. Wald, a former head of American air forces in the gulf who is the new deputy commander of United States forces in Europe.

The United States has already stockpiled hundreds of M1A1 Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers in the region, particularly in Kuwait. The military has also been stockpiling precision-guided munitions in the area and lining up local contractors to provide supplies for troops.

And while tens of thousands of American air, land and sea troops are now within striking distance of the gulf, an offensive, and any peacekeeping operation afterward, would require many thousands more.

Logistical equipment tugboats, forklifts and other equipment used to unload heavy gear is either en route or ready to be sent, as is portable bridging that the Army would use to ford rivers in Iraq. Heavy equipment for Marine or Army divisions would go via fast sea-lift ships that take about a month from Gulf of Mexico and East Coast ports.

B-2 bombers, which would play a pivotal role in destroying Iraqi air defenses, would fly from bases in Britain and the British territory of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The bombers' sensitive radar-evading skin requires the Air Force to erect portable hangars.

"There's an enormous amount already in theater, and I'd say within 30 days of an order, we'd have a substantial tank and mechanized force in place," said Gen. Barry McCaffrey, a retired Army commander from the gulf war in 1991.

A war with Iraq could require more than the 265,000 National Guard and Reserve troops summoned to active duty in the war in 1991, largely to protect valuable sites in the United States like airports, power plants and pipelines.

Finally, any military campaign against Iraq would begin with a psychological operations campaign intended to turn Mr. Hussein's forces against him. Mr. Rumsfeld has approved the outlines of an ambitious plan that goes beyond traditional leaflet drops and broadcasts, a senior Defense Department official said. Of course, officials said, the buildup of American forces in the region is a big psychological operation in itself.

[The Jays]

In exchange for cooperation, Iran wants the United States to release billions of dollars in assets frozen in American financial institutions after American Embassy workers were taken hostage in 1979. It is also seeking pledges of assistance for Iraqi refugees who might pour into Iran if war breaks out.

... we don't need Iran that badly.... if we unfreeze their assets, does that mean we forgive them for being terrorists?

[The Painter]

If we unfreeze Iran's assets, they will have more money to buy weapons to use against us. I don't think the UN inspectors will find anything in Iraq. They will be sent to the wrong places. Everyone thinks Saddam Hussien is an idiot. Maybe not. He's still there. Find a bomb, don't find a bomb, We are still going to go in there. We'll just violate them on some other sanction.. The inspectors are just a formality before we go in and kick some serious ass

[PlasticMan]

Unfreezing Iran's assets means forgiving them for something they did 25 years ago. How quickly did we "forgive" the Germans? Pretty sure it was before the 70's...