Britain finds Iraq's 'smoking gun': a top-secret missile
May 26, 2003 5:05 AM   Subscribe

Britain finds Iraq's 'smoking gun': a top-secret missile Ok. Now reveal what you have always believed and affirm or deny this.
posted by Postroad (73 comments total)
 
Headline: Britain finds ... a top-secret missile

Story: British military officers have uncovered an attempt ... Plans for the surface-to-surface missile ... Saddam's masterplan ...

Yeah, keep looking guys. I think Saddam had a masterplan to take over the world and have everyone worship him, too. I don't think it happened though.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 5:11 AM on May 26, 2003


Let me emphasise: that headline is one of the worst pieces of broadsheet journalism I've ever seen. They could have included the word "plan", but they chose to lie instead. It doesn't do wonders for my already limited faith in the Telegraph.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 5:18 AM on May 26, 2003


From the article, it sounds as if they didn't even find physical plans -- just a couple of Iraqis who were willing to say Saddam had plans.
posted by Bryant at 5:33 AM on May 26, 2003


Oh well... it's just another crap-o-matic-4003 production with a blatter-o-bladder-592 extension pissin all over itself and the mechanic. Send the poor guy a toilet.
posted by psychomedia at 5:46 AM on May 26, 2003


oh-yeee. next time me too will think before me writes.
posted by psychomedia at 5:56 AM on May 26, 2003


Damn! I bet it would be big enough to carry at least 20 Iraqi fedayin sitting astride it, holding buckets of bleach or any other of the extremely dangerous chemicals Saddam must have used to clean his bathrooms. Doh! careful with that bucket, Ismael...
posted by acrobat at 6:01 AM on May 26, 2003


Four words: French. passports. to. Syria.
posted by hama7 at 6:29 AM on May 26, 2003


Metafilter finds Postroad's 'smoking gun': an article depicting Saddam's uncoroborrated plan to build a top-secret missile.
posted by ( .)(. ) at 6:30 AM on May 26, 2003


haha7: 5 words: Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam.

This game is fun.
posted by Space Coyote at 6:50 AM on May 26, 2003


And don't forget the Iraqi top-secret super advanced remote controled Super-Drone!
posted by CrazyJub at 6:53 AM on May 26, 2003


it's just another crap-o-matic-4003 production with a blatter-o-bladder-592 extension pissin all over itself and the mechanic. Send the poor guy a toilet.

Two words : pure poetry!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:54 AM on May 26, 2003


If this story is even remotely true, and they use this as the proverbial "smoking-gun". Does that mean the coalition knew this information ahead of time?

"Plans for the surface-to-surface missile were one of the regime's most closely-guarded secrets and were unknown to United Nations weapons inspectors"

If so, why didn't they tell the UN inspectors??
posted by CrazyJub at 6:56 AM on May 26, 2003


There's a partial explanation for this sort of thing.

The people who write articles and the people who write headlines are two different people in two different jobs, who apparently don't communicate well.

I see this disconnect all the time in my city's fine newspaper.
posted by jpburns at 7:17 AM on May 26, 2003


Postroad: What the fuck are you thinking posting this rubbish? I'd call it a troll but it's so ineptly done it would be like fishing with a brick for bait.

Not only is the headline misleading but you go on to ask that we, "reveal what you have always believed and affirm or deny this."

Making a post, particularly an Iraq post, and then asking us to recycle beliefs that are stated far too often (in direct contradiction to Matt's repeated requests to desist) is inexcusable. This should probably be in MetaTalk, but it is my desire to derail this (soon to be deleted) trainwreck of thread.
posted by cedar at 7:18 AM on May 26, 2003


When I first read the article (maybe I need a cup of tea) I thought, they found the smoking gun.... they found the missile.

Ur... but nope, just: ""We had finished the research stage and entered the development stage," said a senior Iraqi engineer who worked at the MIC and is now co-operating with British officials. "If it had not been for the war, development would have been completed within a year.""

So it hadn't been built. And, I wonder what would have been the likelihood of inspectors happening across this as the missile was built and tested? They happened along other missiles that were cheating (though by only a few kilometres) UN rules.

When Blair tried to sell his snake oil excuse for a war to us, the British public, his employers and bosses, he said that Iraq had the capability to launch an attack, on Britain, within 72 hours.
International law allows for defesive attacks against iminent threats, like that.

Now we have a missile plan that might have been (assuming it was missed by the constant inspections) developed in a year's time, and could have been used for carrying conventional weaponry, as well as possibly chemical, etc.

And it's range was onlly 600 miles. A threat to Israel. So we went to war to stop Iraq attacking Israel, possibly, perhaps a year from now?

Well, it's nice they're admitting it was all about protecting Israel, after all.

"The discovery of the plans for Saddam's secret missile programme is being hailed as a significant breakthrough by coalition commanders..."

I smell desperation.
posted by Blue Stone at 7:20 AM on May 26, 2003


Now reveal what you have always believed and affirm or deny this.

You know, I never spoke with anyone before the war tat didn't think that Saddam Hussein had some secret stash of chemical weapons, somewhere. The difference of opinion was on whether (a) this was a threat to us, and (b) whether Bush's specific plans regarding attacking Iraq were worthwhile, given their existence.

This is why the post-war cleanup is just such a hilarious shock. Everyone was willing to concede, "well yes saddam hussein likely has some illegal weapons, but this isn't necessarily an immediate threat requiring action outside the UN and NATO." However, now it turns out that the original issue of illegal weapons was false to begin with. So if you want to know, "what I have always believed," it's that Iraq never rose to the level of a threat necessary to make it our #1 international priority. I think that the post-war cleanup has pretty much confirmed that assessment.
posted by deanc at 7:23 AM on May 26, 2003


Sheesh. "Well, uh, he almost had a weapon that might've attacked someone - 'course, they never built it, and there's no evidence he even had plans, 'cept for a few Iraqis willing to talk in exchange for, well, we can't tell you that."

It's simple. We told the UN he had weapons; Saddam told the UN he didn't. The UN inspectors confirmed he didn't. We told the UN they were wrong and were bamboozled, so we're going in to level the country.

We haven't found any weapons. I don't care what he was planning to build in the future; we told the UN he had them now and that's what allegedly made him a threat. Notice it's from the UK - we can't afford at this point to publish this crap, thanks to world opinion, so we get our British lapdog to do it.

What's sad about this is watching our conservative members jump on this as justification for thousands of deaths and billions of dollars in damage, not to mention the decade or so this sets back U.S. relations with the world.
posted by FormlessOne at 7:36 AM on May 26, 2003


What Byrd said.
posted by crunchland at 7:38 AM on May 26, 2003


three words :

i cant add up .
posted by sgt.serenity at 7:42 AM on May 26, 2003


I'll admit that the article isn't really much to go on. But c'mon, is finding an actual missile just chillin' out in a closet somewhere really all that important to you people... as far as "proof" is concerned? Why aren't detailed plans enough?

"I plan to open a business someday" is vastly different from "take a look at my business proposal; here are the blueprints". The pursuit of WMDs and the missile to carry them is just as crucial as a missile in production. I'd RATHER they find plans, than actual missiles and the like.
posted by Witty at 7:57 AM on May 26, 2003


This is the smoking gun? Puh-lease. And Witty, we were told by Uncle Colin that US Intel KNEW that Sadaam had WMD's. We KNEW WHERE THEY WERE. Now, after a month+ of searching this is all we get. It's still a load of crap.
posted by holycola at 8:03 AM on May 26, 2003


By this logic, people should register their copies of Gun's 'N Ammo as firearms.

A picture may be worth a thousand words, not thousands of lives. Humanity makes me sick.
posted by Dark Messiah at 8:03 AM on May 26, 2003


Do you think there are many dodgy (and not) countries in the world at the moment who don't have plans to build a better missile?

I don't see anybody else getting invaded because of it.

Dunno about you guys, but I'm still waiting..
posted by cell at 8:08 AM on May 26, 2003


This headline is completely dishonest. Those words are going to stick in people's heads, especially those who have been waiting to hear them. If you want to know whether this war was bullshit or not, the info. has been available all along. If you don't want to know, then congratualtions, you are in the majority (in the US, at least).
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 8:30 AM on May 26, 2003


Humanity makes me sick.

why, Dark Messiah! I thought only an enormous prick would be capable of saying something like that!
posted by quonsar at 9:04 AM on May 26, 2003


But we know that they had the "intellectual capacity" to produce such weapons, so by golly, we had to do something!

Excuse me, I need to scrape something off my shoe...
posted by 2sheets at 9:07 AM on May 26, 2003


Now reveal what you have always believed and affirm or deny this.

Okay.

I have always believed that Postroad flings hysterical nonsense just to annoy people.

Affirmed.
posted by stefanie at 9:12 AM on May 26, 2003


Old news, in a sense...over a decade ago, Saddam was known to be working on a "Super Gun." This FPP seems to be largely a retread of Saddam's plans to keep the program going.

Hyperbole aside, I find the reports to be believable. We'll find more bad stuff - very bad stuff.
posted by davidmsc at 9:16 AM on May 26, 2003


chocolate and peanut butter. horse and carriage. postroad and hama7. piss and shit.
posted by donkeyschlong at 9:23 AM on May 26, 2003


I'm getting the distinct feeling that a lot of you disapprove of the actions of the US and British governments that lead to the deaths of fellow soldier-citizens.

I mean, it really sounds like having your soldiers killed for a war that was promoted on the basis of the imminent threat of an enemy that had no weapons just doesn't sit right with you.

Now, I haven't been following the US government script really carefully, but I think the general gist of it is that this makes you anti-patriotic, and nearly as bad as a terrorist.

To shame!
posted by five fresh fish at 9:31 AM on May 26, 2003


never mind searching out wmd's ,
this is more proof that the us govt should be concentrating its efforts on removing internet access from nursing homes.
posted by sgt.serenity at 9:37 AM on May 26, 2003


2sheets:
That link was fucking hilarious. From John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs: “There has been a lot of misunderstanding as to exactly what it was we expected to find and when we expected to find it.”

No, there has not been any misunderstanding, asshole. The lies of you and your superiors have been simple and transparent from day one (even if they were true, how hard is it to understand "they have WMD?"). I'm starting to get why the xtian right likes Bush so much: the humility generated by having your intelligence insulted on a daily basis could reach christlike proportions.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 10:01 AM on May 26, 2003


The missile plans do represent a direct threat. They could make them into paper airplanes and wound us with the sharp pointy bits.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:02 AM on May 26, 2003


Now the British media is starting to pander to the Bush administration? Looks like it's spreading.
posted by gramcracker at 10:42 AM on May 26, 2003


Metafilter: What the fuck are you thinking posting this rubbish?
posted by adampsyche at 10:45 AM on May 26, 2003


Hee. Kirkaracha, that comment's right up there with Desert W. Storm. One small notch below "somebody set us up the balm. Be proud.
posted by grrarrgh00 at 10:48 AM on May 26, 2003


Hmm I thought we were looking more for weapons with warheads capable of Mass destruction. ie nuclear chemical or biological. Not weapons with the capability to splash into the Mediterranean.
posted by bitdamaged at 10:54 AM on May 26, 2003


Hey, wait a minute! I thought they said WsMD were not the real reason for the war? Now that they think they have something, they're trying to focus attention back on weapons of mass destruction?

Oh, Fat Tony!

And another thing: The missile had (or would have had, if it had gotten out of the planning stages) a range of 600 miles. Now, I am a product of the US school system, but even I know that America is at least 700 miles away from Iraq. So where's the threat to Homeland Security?

Also, a missile that would have potentially carried a payload of bio/chem weapons is not in itself a biological or chemical weapon, and thus this is not a weapon of mass destruction. Not much of a smoking gun, dude.
posted by Hildago at 10:58 AM on May 26, 2003


I heard they also found some bullets, a few guns, and even some artillery.

That madman!
posted by skallas at 11:01 AM on May 26, 2003


...and I heard they found the Iranian border. tricky.
posted by psychomedia at 11:05 AM on May 26, 2003


Now reveal what you have always believed and affirm or deny this.

Quite amazing. Stunning, in fact. I haven't seen this kind of troll craftsmanship in years. The quality! The artistry! The way you combined consummate trollery with dialog worthy of George Lucas... I'm in awe, sir. In awe. Bravo! A++! Smooth transaction, would do business again!
posted by RylandDotNet at 12:04 PM on May 26, 2003


Let's see what UN resolution 687 has to say about what is illegal here...

"Iraq shall unconditionally accept the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of .... All ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and related major parts, and repair and production facilities."

It sounds to me that we are mostly looking at plans at this point, with no working missiles. As such, there is nothing hardware-wise that really could be called a missile as yet. Admittedly, this could have changed in the future, but plans or a project to develop missiles in themselves do not clearly indicate a violation of the UN resolution, and no convincing evidence has been provided to show that this was a highly active program in any way other than research.

In other words, Iraq can do all the research and planning that they want... they just can't make whole missiles.
posted by insomnia_lj at 12:32 PM on May 26, 2003


Even if Iraq had a missle capable of hitting Israel, how would that obligate the US to invade Iraq?
posted by scarabic at 12:35 PM on May 26, 2003


Meanwhile, at the NYT: "An internal e-mail by Judith Miller, the paper's top reporter on bioterrorism, acknowledges that her main source for such articles has been Ahmad Chalabi, a controversial exile leader who is close to top Pentagon officials. Could Chalabi have been using the Times to build a drumbeat that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction?"
posted by homunculus at 12:40 PM on May 26, 2003


Now reveal what you have always believed

I've always believed that you're a troll who provides very weak, unsubstantiated links to try to make a (sometimes racist) point. Ok.
posted by matteo at 12:48 PM on May 26, 2003


"An internal e-mail by Judith Miller, the paper's top reporter on bioterrorism, acknowledges that her main source for such articles has been Ahmad Chalabi, a controversial exile leader who is close to top Pentagon officials. Could Chalabi have been using the Times to build a drumbeat that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction?"

Chalabi is a source? Fuck the NYT. Is that laziness or disohnesty?
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 12:58 PM on May 26, 2003


So where's the threat to Homeland Security?

The threat comes from within the USA.

It's an unsettling thought, but what has been the real consequence of 9/11?

Answer: a crackdown on American freedoms and ideals unseen since the days of J. Edgar.

Perhaps the war against Iraq had nothing to do with Iraq, and everything to do with distracting the population from what was happening back at home.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:09 PM on May 26, 2003


The funniest thing about all these "smoking gun finally found" newspaper stories (and the FPPs linking to them) is that each one is a tacit admission that the previous ones were bullshit. Unless someone can finally discover the first smoking gun more than once.

Of course we're not expected to think about that. Eventually enough people will say, "Yeah, they did find WMD in Iraq -- I remember reading that in the newspaper", and the goal will be accomplished.

(c.f. "Yeah, Iraq was behind the WTC attacks -- I remember reading that in the newspaper."
posted by boredomjockey at 1:28 PM on May 26, 2003


ok FFF, i totally disagreed with the iraq war, but paranoia is a dangerous habit.
posted by poopy at 1:35 PM on May 26, 2003


poopy
why do you think they pushed so hard for this war?
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 1:37 PM on May 26, 2003


poopy... Patriot Act? Patriot Act II? American citizens held without being charged without lawyers? The denial of African Americans to vote in Florida? (Oh damn, sorry... that last one can't be blamed on the National Bush-in-Charge, only the State Bush-in-Charge.)
posted by benjh at 2:04 PM on May 26, 2003


postroad is funny.
posted by Satapher at 2:19 PM on May 26, 2003


Saddam Hussein has been removed from power. Please get over it.

Don't be too sad though. You can always support Fidel Castro, if it makes you feel better.
posted by Beholder at 2:27 PM on May 26, 2003


Even if Iraq had a missle capable of hitting Israel, how would that obligate the US to invade Iraq?

Because we're Israel's bitch.
posted by beth at 2:36 PM on May 26, 2003


Perhaps the war against Iraq had nothing to do with Iraq, and everything to do with distracting the population from what was happening back at home.

heh. FFF is funny.
posted by poopy at 2:37 PM on May 26, 2003


Perhaps the war against Iraq had nothing to do with Iraq, and everything to do with distracting the population from what was happening back at home

Hey, it's as good a reason as any
posted by Celery at 2:56 PM on May 26, 2003


Saddam Hussein has been removed from power. Please get over it.

thats not the issue, fella. hopefully you realize this and are only indulging in a little self-parody.

You can always support Fidel Castro, if it makes you feel better.

why? he kinda sucks.
posted by mcsweetie at 3:05 PM on May 26, 2003


>"Yeah, they did find WMD in Iraq -- I remember reading that in the newspaper", and the goal will be accomplished.

Seems to be the working strategy of the right. Osama is dead right? I thought I read he died of liver cancer, or they proved all his tapes were faked. I read it somewhere. Dude, he couldn't get his liver medicine because of the bombing! It makes perfect sense!

Saddam he's dead too. I saw a photo on Fox News of a blown up neighborhood.

Hey, remember those "rogue" ships at sea? Those were totally were full of WMDs. It was on the news! (I will also accept, "I have it on the sly that...)

Laugh all you want, but I wonder how much of this "news" will be lodged into the back of the brain of the average voter. 2004 here we come!

Of course we all read the corrections page. Somewhere in the back, right?. Almost non-existant on TV.
posted by skallas at 4:26 PM on May 26, 2003


Beholder, why do you hate America?
posted by CrazyJub at 5:27 PM on May 26, 2003


Better question is why Bush &Co hate America.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:05 PM on May 26, 2003


Beholder hates freedom, that's what he hates. Ironic because it is freedom that is allowing him to be so unpatriotic in the first place!!!
posted by Hildago at 6:17 PM on May 26, 2003


Man, I hate that.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:32 PM on May 26, 2003


The horrible irony of the ongoing search for a "smoking gun" in Iraq.

Evidence of mass destruction is all over Iraq. The dead and the soon to die speak eloquently of the "preemptive", cowardly use of weapons of destruction by a certain country in Iraq. The carnage from the "smoking guns" of an aggressor nation lie plainly in view for all to see.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 8:16 PM on May 26, 2003


Guess what: this lovely British paper the Telegraph, which has also brought us such bogus finds as a British MP's secret payoffs from Saddam, has a board of advisors that includes Richard Perle and Henry Kissinger. It's just not that trustworthy.
posted by inksyndicate at 8:17 PM on May 26, 2003


Whoops, ha ha, didn't mean to link to a Nazi anti-semitic site discussing the "evil Zionist." I just included a link to the first site containing the Telegraph and Perle, and it turned out to be some KKK member.

Anyway, there was a London Times article discussing this in the last week. Check it out.
posted by inksyndicate at 8:22 PM on May 26, 2003


Saddam Hussein has been removed from power. Please get over it.

When it comes to the ecomony, Bush has demonstrated genuine leadership. Jesus, Beholder, can you even try to say something in these conversations that doesn't sound like you cut-and-pasted it from your favorite astroturf talking points newsletter?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:24 PM on May 26, 2003


But on a tip from the 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment patrolling the area, he took his team to what had been described as a "suspicious-looking town."

It turned out to be a farm recently taken over by a family of shepherds. Harrington talked with the head of the household, then viewed his sheep pen, an untended field of lavender and several mangy dogs.

An hour later, his team was back on the helicopters and headed to Baghdad. It had nothing to report.

posted by homunculus at 10:01 PM on May 26, 2003


I still don't know why they're having so much trouble. Colin Powell has all kinds of photos with circles and arrows drawn all over them.
posted by crunchland at 10:08 PM on May 26, 2003


Even if Iraq had a missle capable of hitting Israel, how would that obligate the US to invade Iraq?

Because we're Israel's bitch.

HAHA!

HAHAHA!!

That's pretty funny, beth....but somebody had to say it. And the fact that somebody said it on one of Postroad's articles.

man....

When it comes to the ecomony, Bush has demonstrated genuine leadership

X..R I think you should explain that a little better. Forcing through some half-assed trickle-down policies does not equal "genuine leadership". It's political bullying.
posted by taumeson at 10:12 PM on May 26, 2003


taumeson - I think good ole XQ was making a reference to this.

ps I *heart* XQUZYPHYR!
posted by mcsweetie at 10:36 PM on May 26, 2003


Just FYIFWIW, Salam Pax has some new posts up on his blog.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:37 PM on May 26, 2003


Hey, wake up! We know who has the WMDs by now, don't we? (But, yes, I forgot. We are the good guys!)
posted by acrobat at 1:29 AM on May 27, 2003


Because we're Israel's bitch.

Indeed, thank you Beth! I've said it so often, it's just not credible for me to say it any longer.
posted by scarabic at 12:14 PM on May 27, 2003


« Older Bad Erotica   |   dancing kitties, bondage & the wacky world of... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments