To: Ish who wrote (139304 ) 7/9/2004 4:12:28 AM From: wonk Respond to of 281500 ...Not only tried but did. Almost 2 tons of uranium have been removed from Iraq by the US.... Sorry, no. The entire yellowcake acquisition story is easily seen as bogus if you just read the National Intelligence Estimate and note the contradictions."...Uranium Acquisition. Iraq retains approximately two-and-a-half tons of 2.5 percent enriched uranium oxide, which the IAEA permits. This low-enriched material could be used as feed material to produce enough HEU for about two nuclear weapons. The use of enriched feed material also would reduce the initial number of centrifuges that Baghdad would need by about half. Iraq could divert this material -- the IAEA inspects it only once a year -- and enrich it to weapons grade before a subsequent inspection discovered it was missing. The IAEA last inspected this material in late January 2002.Iraq has about 500 metric tons of yellowcake and low enriched uranium at Tuwaitha, which is inspected annually by the IAEA. Iraq also began vigorously trying to procure uranium ore and yellowcake; acquiring either would shorten the time Baghdad needs to produce nuclear weapons.... Comment. I find it amazing to find non-sequitors in a National Intelligence Estimate but there it is. Saying having more yellowcake will shorten the time to produce nuclear weapons is like saying putting a bigger gas tank on your car and it will go faster. A foreign government service reported that as of early 2001, Niger planned to send several tons of "pure uranium" (probably yellowcake) to Iraq. As of early 2001, Niger and Iraq reportedly were still working out arrangements for this deal, which could be for up to 500 tons of yellowcake. We do not know the status of this arrangement. fas.org The obvious points: 1. Iraq had a a known 500 TONS of yellowcake; 2. Note the semantic shift in the description of the Foreign Intelligence service report. It shifts tense and level of certainty "...plans to send 2.5 tons..." then to ..."which could be..." 3. Iraq had a KNOWN 2.5 tons of enriched uranium (if memory serves orginally acquired legally for the Osirik Reactor which Israel bombed). So, on point, the stuff that was "found", was the stuff that everyone knew Iraq already had. Non-story. The obvious logical fallacy in the whole yellowcake story is that since Iraq already had 500 tons of yellowcake, why would it take the grave risk of discovery, i.e., with the UN and the U.S looking for any excuse go ape regarding non-compliance, to "only" acquire an additional "several" (usually meaning 2-3) tons. For those mathematically minded, that would have only increased its stock of yellowcake by less than 1%. Finally yellowcake is not enriched uranium and certainly not "highly enriched uranium." slate.msn.com If you want to build a bomb, its a heck of lot faster, cheaper, and more easily hid to acquire spent nuclear fuel from commercial reactors. ww p.s. One doesn't build "dirty bombs" with yellowcake unless one is concerned with a work program for street sweepers."...U.S. military inspection teams have concluded that material looted from Iraq's main nuclear facility at Tuwaitha poses little or no danger to the people who stole it and cannot be converted into an effective "dirty bomb." After cleaning up two small areas of spillage outside the facility, the Washington-based Nuclear Disablement Team determined that the radiation level was no more than double the dosage every human absorbs daily, officials said....." And that's from the Washington Times ....washtimes.com