Thanks Wkmac that was well thought out. I think there may be other types of centrifuges than the ones in the link you posted. The declassifed amount of uranium found was 500 tons of which 250 was enriched. I also think your picture link was wrong but it has been a couple of years. For some odd reason I really think the main research facility was underground and next to a river.
I will say that I do not think the uranium is the smoking gun ,major find. When you say it is odd that the government has not released pictures of centrifuges I will kindly ask why. I am doing a little personal research here. I understand that most people only know what the news tells them.
The first time I read the article I thought there was no way these men were exposed to radiation. I read it again and now I really am not so sure.
I kind of take it like you are making light of the situation that there is just one guy that is having trouble. I think there are more than one soldier having troubles. Whatever the cause is I do hope they find a cure as I think the condition gets worse over time.
Yeah, there are a number of different type centrifuges but in the process to enrich uranium, to my knowledge the gas centrifuge is the most common for the enrichment process. Another process that came from the Manhattan Project was called gaseous diffusion which also takes the uranium hexaflouride through a cascade process to seperate and enrich the U-235. In the case of Iraq, the gas centrifuge seems the most likely choice since earlier hard evidence points to Iraq having acquired that technology via German sources.
This 2003'-2004' IAEA report on Iraq's nuclear activities over the years documents early centrifuge testing where they learned on the less complex type centrifuges before moving into the more advanced. To me, it's like you can't do college level algebra and advanced mathematics if you never took high school mathematics. I mean you could still take it but what are the chances of success?
http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Invo/factsheet.html
When you say it is odd that the government has not released pictures of centrifuges I will kindly ask why.
I'm doing the same thing in asking why. If the key to completing the picture of Saddam having or near having nuke capability, then IMO the enrichment process would be the lynchpin to proving that point. We know Saddam was toying around with it and if the evidence of such existed proving he had fooled the UN, Hans Blix and the IAEA and had post 1991' and later material especially post 1998' which would make Clinton look bad too, then why not reveal it? Could make their claim to go in and remove Saddam a pretty valid one IMO.
No argument prior to 91' and even a little activity post 91' does suggest he was heading in that direction but where is the hard physical evidence? But the greater question is the the one you are asking and that is, "why have they not shown it?" You are dead on the money for asking.
For some odd reason I really think the main research facility was underground and next to a river.
At the Global Security article, there are actually 3 facilites listed and the one you speak of near a river is most likely the Rashdiya Engineering Design Center which is on an island north of Bagdhad. This island was also home headquaters to the Northern Iraq Republican Guard so that should also raise a few eyebrows. From the International Atomic Energy Agency report of 1995' from Hans Blix himself, on page 4 page #5, it list 2 major suspected centrifuge sites in Iraq with Rashdiya and Al Furat being 2 of the 3.
http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Invo/reports/s_1996_14.pdf
Also from the IAEA, a list of suspected WMD sites.
http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/s/971203_sites.htm
I found pics of Al Furat but so far any pics of Rashdiya that were on the net have been killed. Go ahead and ask why again because I don't have the answer. I do plan on hitting Goggle Earth shortly and see if the area in which Rashdiya might be located has any blurry sections. Don't know but here's a question for both of us. Let's say the Rashdiya area is blocked, what should we be thinking? Interesting thought is it not?
I kind of take it like you are making light of the situation that there is just one guy that is having trouble.
From the article you posted the link too:
The e-mail, sent by Sgt. Jason Boatright, a former 101st medic, found its way to the Army Medical Department and eventually to Melanson.
Melanson talked to Boatright, who said more than 200 fellow soldiers were concerned about their health while stationed at Tuwaitha.
Making light of? Not at all. As I read the above on one soldier, Sgt. Boatright emailed a concern as to potential exposure. Now he said there were more than 200 others concerned and this may or may not be true. Let's give the benefit of doubt and go with it that it is. Col. Melanson decides to hold 3 Town meetings on the issue and only 3 soldiers show up for the 3rd meeting according to the article. With this article only and nothing else, where am I suppose to go? Are you suggesting the gov't is lying or some coverup or conspiracy? Are you suggesting we shouldn't believe them?
OK, I was being a bit cute there but I understand your point of concern and it is valid. As SatDriver pointed out with Nam and AO among other past issues, you have good reason to ask more questions. And forget the politics in all of this, I want our guys taken care of period! Even though I will argue the policy that sent them there, if they are there and Congress by vote continues to have them there, they should get off their arse and see to it these guys have everything they need to do the job. Again I disagree on the policy but back up what you passed or rescend by vote.
But in closing I want to return to the cute part just for something to think about. Just a tiny seed to hold in your pocket for a rainy day. As I read over the responses of everyone, I get the underlying presence of untrusting thoughts towards the military and I would think could extend to the civilian gov't itself since said military is civilain commanded at the top. I'm not for one minute suggesting your concerns are not legit and in fact I think they are healthy. But what I find interesting is that the only thing we have to go on in relationship to this whole issue is the article linked by AV8 in the opening thread. No other hard data, no basis of actually cases of exposure, no evidence of harmful exposure at the site in question.
Are there reasons because of the location itself to have questions? Absolutely. Again, I commend the healthy skeptism on all your parts and it's not because of political idealog that I say this. What I am getting too is you should also have this same level of question in all matters until hard provable evidence is shown to support any gov't action. Forget republican, democrat, etc. and just sit back with as neutral a view as you can muster and look hard at the evidence and also look at some of the YouTube videos of various clips of our leaders. Sure, some are funny but they also show a pattern on both sides of misleading, falsehood, deception and downright lying.
Deep down you know what I'm saying is true because look at your comments in the posts. You really don't trust them either deep down where it counts and you are a great American for doing so. And I don't say this thinking you are coming to my POV. I'm happy that you are wanting hard facts.
Be a sketic and cynic to a point and force them to prove everything. Truth will always be truth no matter how hard you push it and the harder you push it the more truth proves itself and thus becomes a very powerful immovable object that makes a nearsayer such an obvious idiot that they just disappear never to be heard again. If you have truth on your side, a naysayer is your best ally in delivering that truth to the masses!
Now that said I want to pose this question not for debate here and I'm gonna ask everyone to reframe from further discussion of what I am about to ask. This is something we should all ponder and ask of ourselves. Leading up to the War in Iraq, we all knew Saddam was a bad dude. We knew he had used and did have WMD. IMO there was no question there. It was the basis of the UN sending in inspectors to find, identify and remove this stuff and I don't think there is any argument that stuff was found and that Saddam was playing cat and mouse. That said, after especially Powell's speech to the UN in 2002', when we did go in, and here's the question to ponder. Were you expecting a much larger or at least more than was found cach of various types of WMD based on what we had been told leading up to the war? I'm not asking about all the other stuff around this, I'm only asking to ask yourself, were you expecting more or has enough been found to equal what you expected?
Just a thought to ponder!
Let's keep these soldiers in our prayers and hope that no exposure took place. Forget the politics, that would be the best news of all!
