Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Piffer Thread on Political Rantings and Ravings -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gamesmistress who wrote (12298)	1/21/2004 8:13:18 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Respond to of 14610

gina, this interview with khidhir hamza (saddam's bombmaker) from october 2001 points in the same direction... pbs.org <snip> What is the nuclear capability, at this point, of Iraq? I believe Iraq now has fully functional design, and complete manufacturing capability for the parts, or parts of the nuclear equipment. The only thing in Iraq remains [to acquire] is the nuclear core. ... German intelligence, which I believe made a very good assessment ... is [that] Iraq should be able to acquire complete this part by 2005, and have three nuclear weapons. It might not be three, though; it might be one or two. [When] I left Iraq, Iraq had the design for a [nuclear] device, not a weapon. They had not hardened the design, and miniaturized it enough to make it a weapon -- a hardy enough weapon for transport, say, a missile. But there was a lot of work going into hardening this design. "Hardening" meaning...? Meaning making it able to withstand a trip. Checking parts against all kinds of shocks and movements and stuff like that. Making it tighter. Making it hardier. Useful on a missile? Useful on a missile. That was a target. The design we had even then could withstand an airplane trip. ... So the whole effort was directed to hardening and miniaturizing. I believe Iraq has it now. You think they have one or two now? No. You think they're growing, or have the possibility within the next couple of years... Yes. ... ... of actually building this? Yes. How successful or unsuccessful was the United Nations in eradicating the nuclear and the biological threat that Iraq presents here? The United Nations inspectors had a very misguided opinion about what is disarmament. ... They thought if you have something, I take it away from you, and you are disarmed. Despite the knowledge you have, the expertise you gained through the years, your contacts that could repurchase parts for you and put the thing back together. They discounted all this. If you have a piece of equipment, they take it away, and you are disarmed. This is simplistic. They are not naïve; I talked to them. I talked to many of the inspectors. We had some kind of give and take in this. But they were restricted. ... For example, on the nuclear ... the critical parts, that Iraq could not replace easily, we did not tell about -- for example, the molds that you make explosives with, the machines that you make explosives with. Nobody is going to sell you these anymore. Very difficult. So Iraq did not give these up. Not a single explosive was given to the inspectors for the nuclear weapon program. Not a single mold, not a single machine. "Given?" I thought they were found. A little bit found, but not explosives. Iraq claimed that these were destroyed in the war. Other parts were given, or were found and given to inspectors. Not everything the inspectors found, by the way, was given to them. They might find something and it disappears on them. And that happened several times. Anyway, suppose even they were given? The expertise is there. Iraq kept a very essential part of the program. The computer-controlled lathe machines and machining device ... these are critical in making the high technology part.