Look, I know exactly where the New York Times thinks they're going with this. The article goes way out of it's way to spin this as some kind of blunder on Bush's part (and how hilarious is it the the Times, which has been wantonly and recklessly leaking sensitive classified material all this time, now thinks it's a big deal that sensitive classified material is available via the government?).

But I don't think they fully appreciate what they've just done. They're revealing that Saddam Hussein was actively working on a nuclear weapon program, had pretty-much all the know-how and only lacked certain elements to put it all together.

So what happens to the the "Iraq had no WMDs" mantra of the Left? It's dead. Buried. Finished.

And doesn't this sentence send a chill up your spine?

"Experts say that at the time, Mr. HusseinÂ’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away."

So Iraq had all the know-how, all the plans, all the designs, "charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building." Unless they were keeping these documents around as future material for paper airplanes, all this stuff constituted a plan of action for some point in the future; but to complete creating these weapons, they would have needed stuff. I don't know an exact list of what they would have needed, but articles like this one give a good idea. Sounds like you need a firing mechanism (the right kind of firearm would suffice), some fairly common industrial equipment like a lathe, material for the bomb casing, some fairly common conventional explosives, all of which would have been easy to get in Iraq. Oh, and, of course, the nuclear material itself.

They would have needed something like... um... you know... what's that stuff called? Oh, that's right.

Yellowcake.

But we know Iraq would never make an effort to get yellowcake. Joe Wilson had tea with officials in Niger who said so.

Posted by: Gary at 09:02 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 359 words, total size 3 kb.