Why is CNN calling these "conventional weapons" and showing old bomb pics?

[BUSHOUT]

And WTF is the matter with them letting an administration spokesman get away without pressing the question of "When did everyone know they were missing?"

Notice how in the WH official response it mentions Condi finding out a month ago. The newshounds (NOT bloodhounds!) dutifully repeat that portion of the story, giving the impression that the WH only found out about it a month ago!

I quote the story:
White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished sometime after the American-led invasion last year.

To me this means they knew the stuff was there after the invasion. Are we to believe they confirmed it afte the invasion, but no order was given to guard/move/destroy it? After his mind is cleared from chainsaw photo-ops, wouldn't something like this ever pop into it?

BTW, LOVElove the Kerry/Edwards official newswire response to it:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=38763

[juliagoolia]

1. Its good they show conventional.. because they show the "WMD" aspect then

that indicates that there were WMDs and a reason to go.

The explosives were conventional but they blew up a lot of kids with conventional explosives.

[BUSHOUT]

4. Yes...I'd prefer simply "powerful explosive"....weapons sounds like guns..

And Bill Hemmer just used the term "munitions" after Kerry spoke.

No, not munitions either.

[LynnTheDem]

24. It wouldn't matter, NO it wouldn't give a reason to invade!

These explosives were KNOWN and SECURED and MONITORED for YEARS.

bush's entire "justification" for invasion was Iraq having UNDECLARED and HIDDEN "WMD". Which of course was false...but even bush didn't try saying we had to invade because Iraq had SECURED and MONITORED WMD.

[tabasco]

2. Because it is conventional.

It's a lot of high grade explosive - the same stuff we put in our bombs and artillery shells. It's simply the amount that is astounding. 350 tons of this stuff makes thousands of very powerful bombs. But it is conventional munitions.

[BUSHOUT]

8. I heard that a "few" pounds is enough for a powerful roadside bomb...

That would mean if you take 350 tonnes (some are saying more)
That's 700,000 pounds,

which would give you 140000 roadside bombs.

Or 700,000 bombs capable of bringing down an airplane.

[lawladyprof]

36. Considering the damage that can be done with boxcutters

The potential harm from this much high explosive material is beyond belief.

[LynnTheDem]

3. They ARE conventional

They are NOT prohibited and they are NOT "WMD".

[BUSHOUT]

6. But are they "weapons" or "munitions"?

Both terms were just used on CNN.

I think people are so used to hearing about guns going missing that they would tune it out if they got that impression.

We need to push the fact that these were a "powerful explosive" in a cake form. A 1 pound piece brought down an airplane in the past and this is 700,000 pounds!

You've been spending to much time over at freerepulsives if you feel the need to defend them from being called WMD!

[tabasco]

7. Munitions = weapons.

Munitions:

War materiel, especially weapons and ammunition. Often used in the plural.

Dictionary.com = very good site.

[BUSHOUT]

9. If you look up explosives it don't say anything about weapons/munitions nt

[NJmaverick]

13. Explosives do not have to be weapons

Explosives are used in the private sector for excavation and building demolitions. In this case the Explosives fall into the catagory of weapons/munitions.

[NJmaverick]

11. WMDs do not include conventional explosives

Very important! CONVENTIONAL EXPLOSIVES ARE NOT WMDS


If they were WMDs bush would have a case for Iraq. Instead this was dangerous material that he handed over to terrorists so they can kill Americans. It is bush's idea of keeping this country safe.

[LynnTheDem]

22. No bush would NOT have a case.

bush's case was for UNDECLARED WMD.

These explosives (which are NOT WMD) were DECLARED and KNOWN.

How can one possible say bush would have a case for invading Iraq because they had a munitions depot that was KNOWN and DECLARED and SECURED and MONITORED FOR YEARS??!

[NJmaverick]

23. Misunderstanding

If this stockpile was 350 tons of WMDs, THEN bush would have a case.

They are not WMDs they are convetional explosives that were safe and secure until bush turned them over to the terrorists.

[LynnTheDem]

26. NO he WOULDN'T!

It doesn't matter if these 380 tons of conventional explosives were called "WMD"; they were KNOWN ABOUT and SECURED and MONITORED!

bush invaded because he said Iraq had UNDECLARED AND HIDDEN WMD.

Even bush didn't try to justify his invasion based on KNOWN AND DECLARED AND SECURED AND MONITORED WMD!

[BUSHOUT]

28. Exactly. I don't know why ANYONE here is trying to make the WMD point.

It's not really neccessary.

These had the IAEA seal on them before the war. We knew where they were. Obviously if they were friggin WMD then we'd have been hearing about them from BUshites every day for months now.

[LynnTheDem]

19. They are NOT WMD. They were NOT PROHIBITED. They are NOT WEAPONS.

That's FACTS.

They were KNOWN before the invasion and they were CONVENTIONAL EXPLOSIVES.

And bush didn't bother to order them SECURED.

If you were a country that invaded the USA, would you not order ALL US GUN SHOPS BE SECURED?????

You WOULD if you had ANY common sense whatsoever, otherwise those gun shops would be LOOTED and used against your own troops.

Would you order all TNT warehouses be secured???

Yes if you had any brain because otherwise those warehouses would be looted and used against your own troops.

I have NEVER gone to the freeper site, but I DO KNOW about what is and what isn't "WMD".

CONVENTIONAL EXPLOSIVES are NOT "WMD".

[NJmaverick]

21. You are right

You don't need to go to a freeper site to know the difference between convential weapons and WMDs.

[Karenina]

25. What about these little goodies?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1160105

:shrug:

[Mom_and_Dad]

38. "They are NOT WMD. They were NOT PROHIBITED. They are NOT WEAPONS.

Unfortunately they are most very likely "WEAPONS" now. :(

Brian.

[LynnTheDem]

42. being used IN weapons now, yep.

Thanks to bush.

[oneighty]

20. Not weapons not munitions

they are explosives. Raw explosives. A quarter pound block of TNT removed from its pressed paper container is just a yellowish colored hard plastic looking thing. No odor that I can recall. It is fairly unexciting to detonate and since it is not surrounded by metal, stones etc. it just goes "BANG" releasing a lot of gases and heat. One could stand quite close to it during the "BANG" phase and not be injured.

C-4 looks a lot like marshmallow and smells very sweet as well. As I recall it is only slightly more powerful than TNT. TNT, HBX-1,2: TNT; RDX etc are battlefield explosives and are very difficult to detonate. TNT is the standard for battle field explosives. It can take a direct hit from a forty five caliber bullet with out detonating.

I am curious as to what form the missing explosives were? Were they chunks of explosives waiting to be melted down and cast into shell casings or other munitions..mines? Bombs? Missile warheads?

Very curious.

180

[BUSHOUT]

29. The NYT reported RDX and HDX. VERY BAD STUFF.

You know what's fucking wierd? Last night I looked this stuff up and read all about it with no trouble. Today there's NO pages about it, although google returns a lot of pages that look like they're all gobblygooked...but they're from english sites.

Could the Bush admin be affecting this information? Could they be pulling rank on Google and demanding information about these explosives be kept away from the public for security reasons?

[BUSHOUT]

30. self delete n/t

[oneighty]

34. All high explosives are "Bad stuff"

in the hands of those that know how to use them, and there are many such people.

It is the truth.

180

[BUSHOUT]

41. Yes, but this is VERY VERY Bad stuff. One pound brings airplane down. n/t

[oneighty]

47. Indeed

keep in mind one pound of dynamite would also bring an airplane down. These X explosives deliver more ommmmmph per ounce, but they are not supernatural explosives.

Google Military Explosives. Lot of information there also.

180

[The Traveler]

5. They are conventional weapons

with application to constructing triggering charges for nuclear devices. Sweet Jesus help us. This is primo stuff and there are close to 800,000 pounds of the shit on the loose. How much of it wound up in Iran? Iran has a what? A nuclear program? Oh, crap.

The UN had this stuff under guard until we invaded and they had to pull out. This is what happens when otherwise good soldiers like Franks and Abizaid decide to become political brown nosers. This is what happens when a political hack like Rumsfeld shoves aside all those whose opinions do not dovetail with his own.

If we as a nation do not soundly reject these ass clowns, then the dim witted 45% who still think George Bush can successfully lead a troop of Girl Scouts to a cookie factory will be in for a very rude lesson. Unfortunately, the rest of us will be along for the ride.

[Javaman]

51. True, this stuff is used as a triggering charge for nukes, however...

In order to detonate a nuke you need to have precisely machined explosive lens in order to implode the nuke material down to create the chain reaction. Simply having these explosives and nuclear material, doesn't make a nuke.

[The Traveler]

60. True

It takes a lot of skill and the right gear. Still, not the kind of thing you want the enemy to have in mass quantities ...

[Stephanie]

10. They knew the stuff was there BEFORE the invasion

That's what the IAEA weapons inspectors were doing - cataloguing and sealing these weapons. They knew exactly what was there and where it was. They just did not BOTHER to secure it.

[Nashyra]

15. This is the excuse many moderate repukes have been

looking for to vote for Kerry. This story gives a legitmate cover for many repukes to say they can not vote for *. The straw that broke the camels back.

[endnote]

12. Last time I checked these bombs could kill lotsa people....

[NJmaverick]

14. So can an AK-47

But that assult weapon isn't a WMD either.

[BUSHOUT]

17. WTF?!?

[NJmaverick]

18. Are you confused?

There are 3 catagories of WMDs

Nuclear
Biological
Chemical

Anything else does not fall into the catagory of a WMD.

[BUSHOUT]

27. WTF?!?

[LynnTheDem]

32. Nomad is 100% correct.

BUSH JUSTIFIED his invasion by saying Iraq had UNDECLARED UNKNOWN HIDDEN WMD.

1. CONVENTIONAL EXPLOSIVES ARE NOT WMD.

2. These explosives were KNOWN ABOUT, SECURED, and MONITORED by the UN. They were NOT UNDECLARED, UNKNOWN, HIDDEN.

3. bush FAILED to order this KNOWN SITE and munitions KNOWN sites secured, when HE KNEW BEFORE THE INVASION about these sites, when ANYONE with ANY brain at all would know to secure such sites without being told, because OBVIOUSLY such sites would be looted and these explosives and munitions used against our own troops.

bush did not justify his invasion by saying Iraq had KNOWN, SECURED, MONITORED WMD, and if YOU want to call conventional explosives "WMD" that's fine' you'd be absolutely incorrect, but fine, whatever you fancy. bush said we had to invade Iraq because they had HIDDEN PROHIBITED UNSECURED UNMONITORED WMD.

The QaQaa site was KNOWN and SECURED and MONITORED.

This makes it WORSE for bush; he KNEW and the UN KNEW about these SECURED and MONITORED explosives and they and he KNEW LONG BEFORE bush's invasion, and bush STILL DIDN'T BOTHER to order them secured.

[BUSHOUT]

40. Nobody is calling them WMD's except freepers.

That's why "Nomad" gets a "WTF!?!" from me.

I'd give you one too, but I think you just missed your coffee this morning'!

[LynnTheDem]

43. But I have Diet Mountain Dew

Way more caffeine than coffee, right? :D

Actually some non-freeps here are trying to say these are WMD, thinking this makes bush look worse.

It doesn't, and bush doesn't need help in that anyways, lol!

He KNEW long before his invasion that there was a huge pile of high explosives sitting in Iraq and he never bothered to order the site secured.

What else does anyone need to say??? Imo, that says it all; GROSS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE and total INCOMPETANCE. Get a rope!

[BUSHOUT]

44. Absolutely. But Bush is trying to deflect this by saying...

that they're akin to other "weapons" that went missing in Iraq...of which there were 100's of thousands of tonnes.

We need to keep the focus on the idea that these are HIGH POWER MILITARY EXPLOSIVES....700,000 pounds of it, and only a few pounds is required to create a powerful roadside bomb.

That's 150,000 - 200,000 roadside bombs!

It's an easily transportable, easily hidden, powder-cake substance.
Letting this dangerous stuff fly the coup when they knew it was there is inexcusable. The buck needs to stop with Bush on this one, and already Bush campaign officials are on the tube scoffing at the idea that Bush is responsible.

[LynnTheDem]

52. bush IS responsible...for these high explosives AND

for the 650,000 "other" missing munitions.

ALL of them are KILLING our MEN, WOMEN AND TEENAGERS and ALL OF THEM SHOULD have been SECURED, which is the FIRST THING any president with any COMMON SENSE would have ordered done.

So just keep throwing bushCartel's own words back in their faces...yes these explosives AND ALL THOSE OTHER MISSING MUNITIONS were KNOWN of and never ordered secured by bush.

This is THE most "not me" administration in world history.

[BUSHOUT]

53. Yes, that's 650,000 TONNES of "other" missing munitions..tonnes..n/t

[NJmaverick]

45. Why did you ask why CNN referred to them

As convential weapons? That is the title of this thread, is it not?

[BUSHOUT]

46. WTF?!? sigh. Because they're not conventional weapons.

They are explosives. High power military explosives.

Although a "weapon" could be literally denoted to mean explosives...the connotation of the word is more closely alligned with munitions/guns.

If you'd have read my post you wouldn't have become so confused.

[NJmaverick]

48. The problem is weapons fall in one of two categories

Conventional or they are WMDs. There is no third category. So the confusion comes from your complaint that conventional explosives are not conventional weapons.


Rememember WEAPONS of Mass Destruction includes explosives. This includes nuclear explosives and dirty bombs. So the confusion comes from your misuse of the word weapons.

[BUSHOUT]

49. WTF?!? Why are you so anxious to have these called "conventional weapons"

They're high power military explosives.

EXPLOSIVES!

Please don't bother me anymore.

[NJmaverick]

54. It is simply a matter of sounding intelligent

If you want people to respect you and what you have to say, you need to use the proper terminology. Otherwise people will simply dismiss what you have to say. Anyone that knows about WMDs or military terminology, knows that it is correct to refer to them as conventional weapons. To suggest otherwise leads to confusion at best and bad opinions at worst.

[BUSHOUT]

55. Don't you think that might confuse folks....get them confused with the

650,000 tonnes of OTHER "conventional weapons" that have gone missing.

That's sort of what the Bush admin is tryting to do today, have you noticed?

Now PLEASE buzz off!

[NJmaverick]

58. No most people will not be confused

In fact I think you are the only one I have seen.

[BUSHOUT]

59. WTF!?!

[LynnTheDem]

56. conventional explosives

Which is what they are.

And bush knew they were there long before his invasion, the UN warned him to have the site secured, and bush didn't bother.

Now troops are dead, dying, wounded, because bush didn't bother.

And THAT we all agree on.

[NJmaverick]

57. Exactly Lynn

bush gave 380 tons of high explosives to the terrorists. This is how he makes the world safer for America and it's people.

[NightOwwl]

33. Do you ever have anything to say besides WTF? n/t

[KharmaTrain]

16. At Least They're Using The Word "Invasion"

I remember when I got flamed HERE on DU in my early days for calling it that...we've come a long way.

I'm convinced this regime is tied into tons of third-world gun running and smuggling and the wingnuts and their corporates masters make billions annually on weapons sales. Now, would we dare investigate where these weapons came from...I'd bet there are American corporate names all over those explosives and war profiteers who made money on selling those weapons to Saddam, the in the "clean-up (coughbullshitcough)" and now the "rebuilding" (coughHalliburtoncough),

[BUSHOUT]

31. Anyone else having trouble finding info on HDX and/or RDX on the net. ???

I was able to find all kinds of info on this stuff on google last night. Now I can't.

What is up?

[NightOwwl]

35. Maybe you're using the wrong internets.

I Googled HDX RDX explosives and got a lot of results.

[BUSHOUT]

39. Yes, I got results. Just not the same results describing the power ..

of the compounds.

This cashed site called them "a very powerful military explosive".
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:EdkNYFMoD90J:www.geocities.com/lpumsun/madesimple.htm+hdx+rdx+explosives&hl=en

[lawladyprof]

37. Those unneeded ten of thousands of soldiers

Shinseki (sp?) wanted could have been used to use this stuff.

[slackmaster]

50. They're commercial high explosives, not even weapons

Substances that have a high potential for being abused by people fashioning them into weapons, but not weapons per se.