new weapon inspectors

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-21 01:20am

Graeme Dice wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:UN Inspectors certified North Korea as nuclear free, exactly why should be trust them?
Maybe because at the time North Korea wasn't building nuclear weapons.

And yet we have this whole crisis because they maintained an active program when the UN backed their claim that it was shut down. UN inspectors had been continually monitoring the situation you know, they didn't just swing by once.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-21 01:35am

Master of Ossus wrote:
They have found some SCUD missiles, but the Iraqis do not appear to have fired any of them during the war. Iraq DID fire some other mid-range ballistic missiles, but those were not SCUD's.

FROG-7s were found, to my knowledge. FROG-7 missiles aren't SCUDs. They're unguided, inaccurate and their range is only 70km- well within legal limits for Iraq.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2003-04-21 07:54am

Vympel wrote:Erm- Arrow I don't know what version of events you're following, butinformation was withheld *on request* of the US. Apart from that, nothing was hidden.

Actually I was refering to the unmanned drones that Blix left out of a report to the SC (although it was still in his written report), as it supported the US case.

What doesn't add up to me is that if Saddam had destroyed his WMDs, why didn't he simply turn over the documents and allow his scientist to confirm this (without the minders)? He had a well organized government - and governments always have a paper trail.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-04-21 08:54am

Arrow Mk84 wrote: Actually I was refering to the unmanned drones that Blix left out of a report to the SC (although it was still in his written report), as it supported the US case.

They were in the written report and was declared by Iraq. It didn't support the US case then, or now. It had the engine of a wheed-whacker, made of balsa wood and duct tape, and didn't have the range to bring it under the list of prohibited items.

What doesn't add up to me is that if Saddam had destroyed his WMDs, why didn't he simply turn over the documents and allow his scientist to confirm this (without the minders)? He had a well organized government - and governments always have a paper trail.

Luckily, now that the war is over, the burden of proof is now more than ever on the US to prove that he had WMD. Regarding the paper trail, I read that after 1991 Iraq unilaterally destroyed a lot of it's WMD without being ordered too, and without keeping proper records. Can't remember where it was ...

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2003-04-21 09:30am

Vympel wrote:Regarding the paper trail, I read that after 1991 Iraq unilaterally destroyed a lot of it's WMD without being ordered too, and without keeping proper records. Can't remember where it was ...

If true, that was stupidity on there part. Given the terms that ended the war they should have known that the UN was going to be looking at their WMD programs.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-21 02:21pm

Vympel wrote:
Luckily, now that the war is over, the burden of proof is now more than ever on the US to prove that he had WMD. Regarding the paper trail, I read that after 1991 Iraq unilaterally destroyed a lot of it's WMD without being ordered too, and without keeping proper records. Can't remember where it was ...

That’s been one of the bigger problems with the inspections, Iraq wasn't suppost to destroy anything without inspectors being present. Thus we have quite a lot of munitions, which Iraq claims to have destroyed, but which cannot be verified even in Iraqs own files.