We’ll probably find we lent them the bloody trucks too.
No, no. We paid Halliburton $700 a day for the use of each of the trucks.
:smack: What was I thinking?
hehe… you guys are discussing how many trucks… and the question about HOW THE FUCK did Iraqis manage to haul that much stuff without interference didn’t rise.
So is this the military force that will “seal” the borders against contraband weapons and fighters ? Is this the military occupation that will root out the insurgency ? If they can’t take care of tons of explosives or stop their transport… I don’t see them accomplishing anything significant… I wouldn’t blame Bush directly of course… but the stink of carelessness and callousness is all around this.
Suggestion for thread title
Bush Administration GAVE Terrorists Explosives They Use To Kill U.S. Soldiers
That wrenching enough for ya? I agree the current title sucks – I just checked in because I was wondering why they though it was Al Qaeda producing the roadside bombs, and why they had misspelled the name so badly.
The question of how many truckloads of material where involved is relevant precisely because it tells us how large an operation would have been involved in moving the explosives. Had it been possible to move it with a couple trucks, it wouldn’t be quite as ridiculous for the operation to have been missed, though it still be just as ridiculous that the site wasn’t secured. But since we’re talking about a massive convoy to move the stuff, the level of incompetence involved in having missed it is just that much greater.
I guess most of us take it as read that the Iraqi Defence Force in its various incarnations is an underequipped, minimally trained, insurgent-penetrated bunch that, at the conceivable top of their game, will make the ARVN (remember Vietnamisation and how well that worked) look like the Air Cav.
The best that can hoped for is probably the same expected of the ARVN. They hold together long enough for the coalition to claim Mission Accomplished and scramble for the last chopper out.
That title has my vote - in effect this is what happened.
Or maybe “Bush and Rumsfeld Let the Terrorists Drive Off With Explosives They Use To Kill U.S. Soldiers”.
OTOH, I have a feeling that Al Qaqaa is fixing to become as much of a household word as Abu Ghraib.
Yeah, it’s gonna need some retoooling.
the Bush campaign accused Kerry of using the IAEA announcement to attack the president.
Well, duh. I mean, the buck’s supposed to stop somewhere in that vicinity, y’know?
They used heavy equipment to loot some of the other weapons sites. They probably did the same here. You know, cranes, forklifts, etc.
I know that labeling “terrorist” every Iraqi who fights the invaders of his nation is what the US government and all too much of the US citizens like very much to do. Yet that is only speaking of as much disgusting arrogance then invading the nation itself was.
That there are now in Iraq people who actually can be classified as such is in fact entirely the fault of that US arrogance.
To generalize this labeling = stretching it to all who fights the invaders and its puppet so called “interim/provisionary government” is a meaningless US attempt to save face where there is no face left to save.
“Bush Administration ARMED Iraqi resistance and infiltrating Terrorists to kill Iraqis and US soldiers”
is in my view far more accurate. NOt only because far more Iraqis got killed by these actions, but also because US soldiers are being send there to risk to get killed (Otherwise they would not be there) while the Iraqi population did not asked to be blown up, be it by the US invaders or be it by the reaction on that invasion.
Salaam. A
Absolutely amazing-- the UN can do a better job keeping an eye on Saddam’s weapons than Bush & Rumsfeld.
From the article on CNN.com:
Apparently prior to this announcement, the Iraqi’s believed they had instead raided the mythical Play Doh Fun Factory…
I find this very informative:
Read: Bush really thinks that there is simply nothing on which Kerry can attack him besides all the Bush lies and criminal negligence and criminal stupidities that keep surfacing.
Read: The Bush-Cheney tandem has a clear vision: “Let’s arm them in a way they can blow themselves up, that shall teach them a lesson”.
Read: Bush believes in war that much that he arms the other side in order to keep the bloodshed going.
Salaam. A
By the way: I think my last sentence in the former post would be an excellent title for this thread.
There will be more violence as the enemies of freedom become more desperate. By arming them, we allow them to ‘bring it on’, and thus become more desperate. If we give enough firepower, they will surrender.
How about something really straightforward. like: We gave them the bombs to kill our soldiers. Thank god the world is safer now.
FUCK.
Unfortunately, the lack of security for all these explosives fails to get me pissed off, as it’s just another example of the sheer overwhelming incompetence of this Administration. I’m more pissed at the notion that the IAEA and/or other authorities were not informed of this screwup earlier, because the Powers That Be™ didn’t want the bad news to embarass el Presidente.
As for the idea of a better thread title, I’d nominate “Invade Iraq? Let’s give terrorists 350 tons of explosives, too!” myself.
The military probably thought it was a pilgramage site ?
Maybe the insurgency bribed a few Haliburton employees into helping take the stuff away ?
“Its wierd how Iraqis come and go to the same place… taking those neat bricks. Must be for building houses.” :smack:
Change the thread title to “Explosives R’ us”
The Administration’s response, to their credit, has been immediate and unconditional: they’ve stressed that they’re appalled that this has happened, and that they’re going to launch an immediate nonpartisan investigation to find out how such a massive error could have occurred, and have expressed their deep and profound apologies over this catastrophic error.
Sonsabitches. I thought I’d lost the ability to be surprised by their sliminess.
Daniel