Given this story, we're we still mislead?

[MTdream]

Yellowcake uranium is just processed uranium into a more pure form. It cannot be directly used for weapons, it takes more work and further processing. Yellowcake is used in nuclear energy. Since they had a nuclear reactor operational, I think it would be safe to say they had yellowcake. I thought that whole Valerie Plame thing was an over exaggeration anyways?

you missed my point...it does nto take weapons grade to panic people...since it is essentially a powderized form as it sits...it is easily mixed with other stuff...and thus can cause the illusion of a bigger issue...

I agree yellowcake itself is nto a big issue, but the markets and the public at large are run by emotion, and when a bombing happens emotion vs. facts...emotion wins...

 

[MTdream]

I am not sure, though the French have been strong trading partners with that region of the world for a pretty long while.

Yup, remember the Iraq oil for food scandal? France was centerpieced in the whole scandal...

they were VERY against us invading, as they knew they were involved and did not want the embarassment...and fortunately, atleast on this continent, the media helped them to get by...However, the french people reacted pretty solidly, and threw out the liberal party and put back in teh conservatives...

 

[MTdream]

"Given this story, we're we still mislead?"

In a word yes, at least to the extent we know. The fact they moved Leave it to Fox to try to find an angle that doesn't exist!

Sorry, story was not broken by Fox...

 

[winter brew]

Since it was not being used in a power generating nuclear reactor....what else might it have been for?

 

[ruffryder]

So 550 metric tons of yellowcake is not dangerous? Are you serious?

I guess I should have said atomic weapons, not weapons in general. Sorry for the confusion. Yes dirty bombs are dangerous, but I was talking about a nuclear bomb as the type of WMD's.

As for the comment about the Bush administration controlling the media. Give us some examples here, because as I recall the media couldn't have gotten away with crap during world war II courtesy one Pres. Roosevelt.

All I got are the comments I have heard from Scott McClellan

 

[ruffryder]

Since it was not being used in a power generating nuclear reactor....what else might it have been for?

They do have a reactor.

 

[winter brew]

They do have a reactor.

But it supposedly wasn't for or from the reactor from what I have read.....if it was there would be no story I suppose.

 

[Ollie]

I guess I should have said atomic weapons, not weapons in general. Sorry for the confusion. Yes dirty bombs are dangerous, but I was talking about a nuclear bomb as the type of WMD's.

Ok, so making an entire city uninhabitable due to radiation fall out from a dirty bomb is fine as long as you don't actually nuke it??

Don't know about you but I would much rather be blown to bits than die a nice slow death from radiation poisoning.

I guess you need to define weapons of mass destruction. I consider it any weapon that can kill a load of people either right away or over a relatively short time. I am talking over an area defined by a few hundred yards in all directions.

 

[ridermk]

They do have a reactor.

Israel permanently put the reactor out of commission in 1981, and it was never repaired.

 

[ruffryder]

if it was there would be no story I suppose.

and the reason the story wasn't broadcasted in all of media land, it would be.

 

[ruffryder]

Ok, so making an entire city uninhabitable due to radiation fall out from a dirty bomb is fine as long as you don't actually nuke it??

Don't know about you but I would much rather be blown to bits than die a nice slow death from radiation poisoning.

I guess you need to define weapons of mass destruction. I consider it any weapon that can kill a load of people either right away or over a relatively short time. I am talking over an area defined by a few hundred yards in all directions.

Crap, now we are arguing over the definition of WMD's? I guess you would have to put fertilizer in there too then right? Just an issue of quantity.

I thought the dirty bombs had to be on the ground to be utilized, you couldn't make a warhead and send it to another country?

I would not define a dirty bomb as a WMD, though it is in the gray area of the definition regardless.

 

[ruffryder]

Israel permanently put the reactor out of commission in 1981, and it was never repaired.

Yep, you are correct. I guess I should have said they "had" a reactor. So where does all the fuel go when there is no longer a reactor to utilize it?

 

[maluchm]

I would not define a dirty bomb as a WMD, though it is in the gray area of the definition regardless.

So we'll just put them in the same category as the hand grenade then.

 

[hilinerider]

iran,

suposedly they have built a couple reactors underground, seen some pics of them building it then after they were done burying it they spiffed it all up to make the servailance photos look like nothin was there

 

[MTdream]

Crap, now we are arguing over the definition of WMD's? I guess you would have to put fertilizer in there too then right? Just an issue of quantity.

I thought the dirty bombs had to be on the ground to be utilized, you couldn't make a warhead and send it to another country?

I would not define a dirty bomb as a WMD, though it is in the gray area of the definition regardless.

well, why not fertilizer...airplanes are...so are women with bombs strapped to them...

The point really is, IMHO, Mass Destruction...not necessarily the conventional view of a weapon...same logic on IED Improvised Explosive device..you know a goat or dog...that is an IED...but last I checked Fido was not classified as a Weapon, except after he eats something funky...

there is no doubt that Yellow Cake is considered a key thing for creating terror...remember all they really care about is disrupting and disturbing our way of life...since we are infidels...

trying to put logic and reason to terrorists is kind of an oxymoron...with all puns intended

 

[maluchm]

That's why the "Dirty bomb" is more considered a Weapon of Mass Disruption. It still can kill MASS amounts a people though.

 

[ruffryder]

wiki WMD's

I guess I need to change my definition of WMD's. Point conceded.

 

[Ollie]

I thought the dirty bombs had to be on the ground to be utilized, you couldn't make a warhead and send it to another country?

I would not define a dirty bomb as a WMD, though it is in the gray area of the definition regardless.

Sadam was trying to SELL The yellow cake to terrorist orgs. What did you think they were going to do with it??

All they have to do is walk across the boarder with mexico and cry to a dem and they will be given US citizenship, then they just import the yellow cake.

Actually, a dirty bomb has the potiential to be a lot more deady than say a sarin nerve gas attack. It covers a larger area, is easily spread thru the air by a bomb blast and doesn't go away. You have to decon the entire area. If that area is a city, guess what? no more city.

 

[MTdream]

Sadam was trying to SELL The yellow cake to terrorist orgs. What did you think they were going to do with it??

All they have to do is walk across the boarder with mexico and cry to a dem and they will be given US citizenship, then they just import the yellow cake.

Actually, a dirty bomb has the potiential to be a lot more deady than say a sarin nerve gas attack. It covers a larger area, is easily spread thru the air by a bomb blast and doesn't go away. You have to decon the entire area. If that area is a city, guess what? no more city.

BINGO!!! rep points added!!!

Here is a pic of it, in case others dont know...

 

[ruffryder]

BINGO!!! rep points added!!!

Here is a pic of it, in case others dont

Know all we need is some chocolate frosting and we got ourselves some dessert!

Oh, I thought Sadam was trying to BUY more of the stuff, not sell it?