I sure everybody agrees that the iraq war is a tragedy, wheather you agree with the war or not. However, in my opinion, the biggest tragedy is that the insurgency could easily have been prevented.
When we first invaded iraq, the military commanders origionaly wanted a force of at least 300,000 troops, with some plans calling for more. With Bush and Rumsfeld 's vision of a transformed military, they ended up only sending aprox. 150,000 troops. While the reduced troop force did not cause siginificant problems, this became a huge problem when the country went into chaos after the regime fell . Even Bagdad, which had a relativly large troop contingent in it was looted and pillaged. Others fell completly into anarchy. Even after this, Rumsfeld recalled troops that were going to be sent to iraq because he wanted to get out of the country early. This left the country in complete disaray.
Another problem after the invasion was that iraq was full of weapons from it's years of warfare, and the only major search for weapons was the search for WMDs, whic h turned out to be frutless. Ammo dumps were looted all over the country by citizens that didn't feel safe due to the lack of sufficent U.S troops. The DOD (department of defense) estimated that at least 250,000 tons of weapons were left in the country -to put that in perspective, the hiroshima bomb was equivilant to 20,000 tons of TNT, so that 's equivilant to 12.5 hiroshma bombs. It's almost imposible to control a country so flush with weapons.
Another big problem was the disolution of the iraqi army. Even though the army had fallen apart due to the war, it could have been posible to call back some of the troops, providing at least some added security. Instead, aprox. 300,000 angry people with weapons and military training out were out of jobs and on the streets. This has not only has this helped cause the insergency, but lead to a crime wave. This combined with the fact that sadam let all the criminals out of the jails lead to a little known fact that much of the violence was due to armed criminal gangs.
These are just some of the factors that lead to the brutal insurgency that happened after the invasion. Many of these factors could have been prevented, which has caused a tragedy for both the U.S, iraq, and the greater middle east
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 36
Iraq is but the tip of the iceberg, you ain't seen nothin yet.
Iraq war is a disaster.
I have answered this query before = it will end th emoment it ceases to be a source of profit for wealthy elitists.
Consider this article from the UK =
War Profits Galore!
How US merchants of fear sparked a $130bn bonanza
The homeland security market has an army of lobbyists working for its interests in Washington
Paul Harris in New York
Sunday September 10, 2006
The Observer
Brian Lehman's farm lies down a gravel road, between two fields of swaying corn as tall as a man. It is in the middle of Indiana's rural heartland in a landscape populated mostly by bearded Amish farmers and their wives.
Horse-drawn buggies are more common than cars, roads are littered with horse manure and fields are worked by hand. It feels distant in time and place from big cities such as New York or Washington, or even Indianapolis, two hours' drive south.
Yet Lehman's farm, from which he runs a small popcorn business, was recently declared a target for terrorists. State security officials included it in a list of assets considered potential victims of attack, most likely by Islamic fanatics. That was a surprise to Lehman, who had previously never considered Amish Country Popcorn on the front line in the war on terror. But he reckons he knows why he was chosen: 'It's the money.'
Five years after the World Trade Centre fell, a highly lucrative industry has been born in America - homeland security. There has been a goldrush as companies scoop up government contracts and peddle products that they say are designed to make America safe.
The figures are stunning. Seven years ago there were nine companies with federal homeland security contracts. By 2003 it was 3,512. Now there are 33,890. The money is huge. Since 2000, $130bn (£70bn) of contracts have been dished out. By 2015 annual federal spending on the industry could be $170bn.
But state officials want in on the government handouts too. That is why Indiana ended up identifying 8,591 potential terrorism targets (including Lehman's farm) inside its Midwestern borders. But they went too far.
Indiana's total was the most of any state - twice as many as California and 30 per cent more than New York.
The reason is simple. With so much money on offer and such riches being made, there is a powerful economic incentive to exploit the threat to America. The homeland security industry has an army of lobbyists working for its interests in Washington. It grows bigger each year and they want to keep the money flowing. America is in the grip of a business based on fear.
Inside a fancy office block in downtown Washington DC lie the offices of the Ashcroft Group. It is six blocks from the imposing buildings of the Department of Justice where the head of the firm, John Ashcroft, used to be President George W. Bush's Attorney General. As Attorney General, Ashcroft controversially extended the surveillance powers of the state in order to fight terrorism. Now he lobbies and consults on behalf of technology companies seeking to capitalise on the new powers. His clients include firms such as ChoicePoint, which gathers data on individuals and sells it, and Innova, which makes software for surveillance drones and robots.
In turning from powerful official to powerful lobbyist, Ashcroft is a brazen example of what critics call Washington's 'revolving door' - a process whereby officials leave public service for the private sector, exploiting their old contacts for commerce. 'It's become the norm that senior officials open up their own shops in their old sectors. It can be incredibly lucrative for them,' said Alex Knott, project manager for Lobby Watch, part of the Centre for Public Integrity.
In the new anti-terrorism industry, centred on the sprawling Department of Homeland Security, the door is revolving faster and faster. Though the department was created only three years ago, 90 of its former officials have already left to make money in lobbying and consulting. They include Tom Ridge, the first head of the department, who - like Ashcroft - now runs his own company. It is a crowded field. In 2001 only two lobbying firms registered as homeland security consultants. By the end of 2005 there were 543. Rules limit the ability of officials to enter the private sector in their old field for at least a year, but they are easily circumvented. They do not apply to those earning less than $140,000 a year and top-ranking officials often get around that by working in the 'background' at their new firms.
In effect there has been a huge privatisation of the homeland security industry in the US. It extends from surveillance issues to developing technology to working in war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan, where many jobs once carried out by the military are now done by private contractors. At government hearings last year ChoicePoint said it considers itself a private intelligence agency doing the government's spying. 'After 9/11 we have seen the rise of the security-industrial complex,' said Peter Swire, a law professor at Ohio State University and former Clinton adviser.
Some aspects of this new industry and its relationship with American citizens sound like science fiction. Dulles Research, another Ashcroft client, claims its software can detect terrorists by monitoring everyday behaviour such as travel schedules, credit card usage and bank transfers. It is bidding for a government contract to monitor millions of people for suspicious patterns.
That is the tip of an iceberg. The industry has the feel of a boom town where the outlandish and the mundane compete for attention. Four years ago there had not been a single business conference for homeland security firms. Now there have been 50. There is an industry newspaper, Government Security News, once a quarterly, now bi-weekly. Venture capital firms exist solely to invest in new and upcoming national security companies. Across America, universities offer courses in homeland security. 'All this money in the industry is just up for grabs. It's like a goldrush,' said Knott.
Of course, there is a real terrorist threat to America. There are many areas of the country, especially its ports and airports, where money needs to be spent to improve security and prevent a tragedy on the scale of 11 September from happening again. Private firms have a vital role to play in this. But there are grave concerns as to whether the industry has properly addressed these issues.
Instead, critics argue, it has trampled citizens' rights by invading their privacy, created an atmosphere of fear and done little to prevent a future attack. There have been many stories on the mis-spending of huge amounts of government money, from bullet-proof vests for dogs in Ohio to puppet shows in Iowa. At the same time US container ports still monitor little of what is imported through them, and a multi-million-dollar scheme for all transport workers to get a tamper-proof ID is two years late, has cost millions and still does not work. States have also fought over who should get the biggest security grants from the federal government. Midwestern states claim they are ignored and more obvious targets, such as New York, say not enough is being spent on them. All of which adds an economic incentive to play up an area's vulnerability.
This explains why Brian Lehman and his popcorn suddenly appeared on a terrorism target list. Lehman reacted with good humour. 'We've really had a lot of fun with it,' he said. It spurred a wave of interest in the company and - far from hiding away from the 'terror threat' - Lehman put up a new sign to help people find the isolated place. In the annual parade last month in Berne, the local town, his truck was painted with a target on the side as a joke. In a bizarre way, Lehman is hoping that he too can reap a bit of extra money from the boom in homeland security.
AS I HAVE WRITTEN ON THIS FORUM BEFORE = THE WAR WILL CONTINUE AS LONG AS THERE IS A PROFIT TO BE MADE FROM IT.
War profitering --- that's what Bush's treasonous war is all about.
But those like Eric R are just fine with that, their kind of honest decent American leadership just watching out for the good of all of us ... uh huh- right !
Decency, conscience or compassion? We lead the world in all three of these qualities and I am quite proud of that. Let me ask you this: would the world be a more decent, conscientious or compassionate place with Saddam Hussein in charge, or the Islamofascists? Is there ONE nation in the Middle East whose decency, conscience or compassion should be OUR model? How about in Europe?
Jerry K, where is the font of decency, conscience and compassion you'd like leading the world?
Honest, decent American leadership helped the free world pervail during World War II, become freer during and after the Cold War, and will help us survive the threat of Islamofacism.
As far as America "rampaging across the globe causing fear and death"...it was not America that caused the fear and death of over three thousand innocent men, women and children five years ago tomorrow. It was an ideology BASED upon fear and death. It was not America that blow up a train station in Madrid, a bus depot in London or a nightclub in Bali. It was another force. It has not been America hacking off the heads of innocent people in order to instill fear and death, it was the enemy we oppose.
Dominant nations throughout history are those that invariably are the greatest aggressors as they have no opponents and they invariably meet their demise: see Rome, France, Germany for several notable examples. The latter examples are both examples of coalitions fighting the aggressor and winning, not nations going it alone.
That's what we need Eric, a world unitedm NOT " a leading nation". A "leading nation" smacks of a nation with imperialistic goals. Oh, now you come to mention it...
PS Eric your name sounds too much like Iraq. I was typing in your name and inadvertently typed Iraq instead.
Fortunately however, at that time, the world worked together, as it should once again.
I place the blame on the deaths in Iraq on Saddam Hussien. We went to war for a variety of valid reasons...all of which were caused by his leadership. The continuing death toll should be laid on those forces that are fostering sectarian violence in the nation.
In the period before the war, the same leftist voices that speak out against our action were claiming that 10,000 iraqis were dying each month because of the sanctions. The only choice the US had was to invade or continue an already crumbling sanctions regime. If they had continued the regime, using the lefts own numbers, 360,000 more iraqis would be dead. Sounds to me like we made the right choice.
Eric how many excuses did George and co. give us before the war as to why Iraq was invaded? How many hold any water? If they couldn't come up with a legitimate reason then there wasn't one. Why doesn't George give the go ahead to invade Sudan and end the suffering in Darfur?
It is too bad that you folks do not really read or understand all of the 'other' sources of information that are available, which would give you the 'real' truth that so conflicts with your 'facts'.
Those qualities that we speak of, decency etc, do not come from the known competitive capitalistic leadership of greedy, money grubbing, power hungry nations using their might around the world while claiming in name only the qualities that have actually contributed to the little good that has been done in the world.
Eric, you folks that all think alike and so condemn the rest of us, had ought to do your homework. Your concept of honorable leadership is quite perverted and pornographic (obscene) ... and your promoting more of the same is just obsequious pandering of your party line !
The qualities we all need, are found within each human that will look to their own intuition for guidance. We each have a common Spirit that would point us in the proper directions of love and compassion if we would just open to it with a little introspection ... rather than being misguided by misguided 'so-called' leaders ... secular and religious !
The real truth lies within the individual heart, all else is just the Blind leading the blind ...
So Eric (excuse the personal) I do not fear anybody or anything. I try to not judge, but that is hard to contain when there is so much going on that is as sad as it is. I do discern though, and it is my discernment that you folks (as stated) have some work ahead of you to catch up with the real facts and truths that would make our world a better place for all ... and should begin right at home, best within each single persons mind.
I may not 'hate', but there is an awful lot of 'folks' out there that do ... and what goes around-comes around. If the shoe fits ... if not ... Peace, j.
But in actuality, I have reread your comments to this article and you have not expressed a fact or truth in any of them. You have expressed your opinion and painted your biases with a superbroad brush.
I have never mentioned Bill OReilly, Rush Limbaugh, but instead of addressing my points directly, you rant about them. I will listen and evaluate what YOU say and address it directly. Please, address what *I*.
My points in this discussion are:
-We had many reasons for entering Iraq. All are still valid even those that did not pan out.
-America DOES have a special role to play in the world. As the leading democracy, the leading economy, the leading military power, we would be remiss if we did not lead. Leadership does not mean autocracy, but it does require courage and conviction.
- The world IS better off with American influence then it would be without it.
- The consequences of failure in Iraq is not even conceivable. Regardless of the debate about WHY we went into Iraq, it must perservere and prevail.
To the left...bring it on!
Thanks for standing up for yourself. Jerry, give it up and get back to the Bong.
mark-johnK
It has not been much of a conversation, and as far as debate goes, that is a losing cause in the long run with those who's minds are made up and not subject to change.
You would like to re-invent the wheel based upon your limited falsely held 'facts', the same irrelevant 'facts' that each of you regurgitate via your 'trusted' sources. Those sources encourage you to never go anywhere else for your information because all other sources are liberal whackos.
I know and recognise this because I have a very wide source to my information, I even watch the detestable FOX so that I can know where the garbage comes from, it is very recognizable.
You folks always ask for point by point contesting, only you disallow the validity of your opposition, seemingly wanting to just contest more than learn anything useful for your betterment.
Anyway, I am sure your minds are made up, as when the view is so narrow, it takes little effort to decide the one of two choices where grey areas are of no consequence to such thinking.
Those that are willing to dig up the lengthy articles that lay out the higher truths such as Clark and Clarke (and others) are just belittled by your little minds anyway, so I know better than to waste my time on you with any real detail.
I already know all that you claim to know, in fact I know it better than even you do, because I can compare the big picture that you will not even look at as it might conflict your chosen 'fact' that you wish to live by.
So, no thanks, you can debate fallacy all you want, I will stick with the essence and intentions behind the detailed BS you all want to use.
By the fruit they bare-they shall be known.
Peace through peace, what goes around-comes around.
My position is not spoon-fed to me by blogs, commentators or radio personalities. They are derived from my analysis of the facts based upon the deep-held values I treasure. And I even spend a good deal of time to evaluate those values.
I am african-american. I am gay. and I am a Republican. Don't tell me that I cannot make up my own mind or that I am a puppet of some right-wing conspiracy. I spend my life doing using my mind and choosing the paths that are right for me.
Disrespecting those that have a different opinion of you is beneath you. Understand that we hold our positions for a reason...just like you do. We may be right or we may be wrong. But the person whose mind is made up is you...and your misconception of me is proof. Learn from it.
It has also become to me increasingly clear that the U.S removal of troops would probably result in a mass genocide and civil war. The last time we pulled out and ignored an islamic country in disaray was afghanistan in the 1980s (and I beleive we all know what happened with that). We would also loose all credibility throughout the world and give the terrorists a safe haven because terrorists thrive off chaos. For that reason, I don't think we can leave, no matter how much everybody wants to.
As a side note, I actually enjoy hearing from Clark because at least he makes an argument.
I spend considerable time reading blogs along these lines, as well as reviewing other sources (I am retired and have the time), things such as the plight of the world, human kind in general, and where it all seems to be headed, are of primary interest to me. I have a deep and abiding spiritual connection to it all.
I do not really consider myself 'liberal' as much as 'progressive', but I recognise the terms and comments against such by those that do follow FOX as their primary source. Granted, you may well not be one of 'them', but based upon the comments you have made, it sure 'sounds' like you have a lot in common.
I am active in these formats basically to attempt to get the attention of readers, I assume there are many that do not comment, more than argue with individuals on a personal level. The issues are the essence of what I am interested in, and, believe it or not, Peace and the betterment of the world.
I can see that we have some different philosophies about what all of that means. I can respect a dissenting concept when it is presented IF it is something more than the common flack put out by those that I do not have any reason to respect ... and those of FOX and that ilk are the real whackos and the haters of the America that I would prefer to see, a respectful nation of peace seekers based upon respect or even love, what we 'supposedly' stand for, not belligerent bullies sending troops around the world to procure bases to defend Oil interests and the like.
So, I guess we all just call it as we see it, we each have our valid reasons I am sure. So I say to the audience in general, just what FOX says; YOU DECIDE !!!
I can live with it whichever way, but not in self acceptance if I did not speak my piece of my truth.
To each their own, I prefer Peace, with all due respect, j.
The war on terror is NOT a war over oil interests. We have spent 320 billion in Iraq. How much oil could that have bought? If we had wanted the oil, we could have lifted the sanctions against Saddam. To be exact, the nations that are opposing us are the ones motivated by oil interest, both in Iraq and Iran.
You say you are unbiased, but you continue to lump people into categories. That is not respect. That is prejudice - pure and simple. You have YET to answer a single one of my points regarding the topics. Regarding your style of debate and your misconceptions you have dismissed my comments entirely. I do not consider you lost or in some eternal opposing camp. There is no reason to debate those that are. You decry judgment, but you have judged an entire category of people as "wackos" and "haters of america".
I will offer you ONE thing that I would like you to try on: Assume those with a different view than yours have good intentions and are as intellegent and informed as you. If you have ONE thing you would like me to consider, I am always willing to listen to you. I only ask that you offer me the same level of respect.
And to those reading, as you said: "You Decide." Who is the most open-minded? Who is judgmental? Who trys to answer the issues? Who tries to veil the issues in spiritual garb that prevents debate?
But I will go down the line of your last to the degree I am willing.
"…some of us recognize that on September 11, 2001 an insidious force declared war on us (earlier actually, we just didn't realize it)…."
What you folks fail to recognize, is that all of those attacks were precipitated in a great part, long, long, before the date you so conveniently use for your reference. It has been ages of western dominance in third world countries where corrupt leaders have been propped up, boundary lines of redistribution of lands, and countless other indignities and crimes against humanity in general, all in the name of extraction of natural resources from those lands at the expense of the common inhabitants, as our 'selected' and installed leaders of those people sold them out !
All such things, too many of you want to disbelieve, as the 'causes' for terrorism as it has struck here at home and abroad. You seem to not be able to recognize that larger picture in time and space that links all such together as common cause and effect. … so sad.
It is that same lack of accountability that will keep terrorism a continuing factor for ages to come. What comes around-goes around ! It is high time to WAKE UP and REALIZE !
"… The war on terror is NOT a war over oil interests. We have spent 320 billion in Iraq. How much oil could that have bought? If we had wanted the oil, we could have lifted the sanctions against Saddam. To be exact, the nations that are opposing us are the ones motivated by oil interest, both in Iraq and Iran. …"
Gee, how naïve … OK, let's just say that it is all about POWER and CONTROL, with that we get the oil. It sure as hell is not about democracy, at least not the kind that we all have been led to believe is so fabulous over the years. NOT!
$320 BILLION (your figure) to the Military Industrial Complex of the Corporate Wealthy. Yeah, they went over the anticipated budget, but who cares, the following generations will be happy to pay for such protection from terrorisms … uh huh, sure !?!
I don't suppose that the nations involved just want to finally get some of their own income from their own natural resources, maybe some how improve their third world status like the ones that have sold out to us as our 'friends' have. ???
"… You say you are unbiased, but you continue to lump people into categories. That is not respect. That is prejudice - pure and simple…."
I put people into the categories they seem most likely to fit within. Lack of respect is a personal perception, if the shoe fits … there is no real prejudice to my knowledge, it is just the way the cookie crumbles, just the way things seem to be. Few things are actually pure and simple, that is just the way narrow minds choose to see that which they cannot comprehend with true clarity otherwise.
"… You have YET to answer a single one of my points regarding the topics. Regarding your style of debate and your misconceptions you have dismissed my comments entirely…."
I have explained all of that earlier about 're-inventing the wheel', they were not dismissed entirely.
"… You decry judgment, but you have judged an entire category of people as "wackos" and "haters of america"…."
I have explained that elsewhere also, I do not 'judge', I DISCERN. The 'wackos' and 'haters of america', are but a REVERSAL of what your FOX people decry about all not of their persuasion. It much better fits them than us ! That is a discernment on my part, I leave it to God for any necessary judgment.
"… I will offer you ONE thing that I would like you to try on: Assume those with a different view than yours have good intentions and are as intellegent and informed as you…."
I would like to think, that if they were, they would surely agree with me. Oh yes, the differing view … that must have come from either just a different genetic structure, or having digested different sources of information, probably both.
"… If you have ONE thing you would like me to consider, I am always willing to listen to you. I only ask that you offer me the same level of respect…."
Try understanding (+=-), that is a Universal view of Truth that will someday transcend the current view of (+=+) and (-=-) that reduces to (+/-), the dualistic thought process of a world fallen in ability to get along.
With the transcendent understanding, we would never have any reason to disrespect another as all diversity would be fully appreciated. There would be compassion and cooperation of a creative order around synergy … rather than the present conflict and destruction of fear that plays out in greed of a competitive nature of winner take all, the hell with the losers because they are less disserving.
"…And to those reading, as you said: "You Decide." Who is the most open-minded? Who is judgmental? Who trys to answer the issues? Who tries to veil the issues in spiritual garb that prevents debate? …"
I am more than willing to let all readers decide for themselves, even in my realizing that most of them will not see, nor place any 'value' upon the 'Spiritual" perspective that I hold and you apparently do not. That is understandable, because so few do, but that is what I am attempting to correct and/or improve upon by these comments and various postings where I encourage all to read my BOOK, which so much better explains what cannot be properly communicated in this format. One need not even purchase it, though that is recommended to get the most from that format, it can be downloaded and/or printed out for free … but it is not for the close minded !
I challenge anyone to find any fault with the BET, the Basic Equation of Truth, expressed as (+=-) !!!
With all due respect, Peace, j.
The value that I receive from debate is the defining, testing and sharpening of the values that I hold. I can only do that if I assume that what the other person says has some value. You do not assume that other's opinions have a value. They are simply wrong.
You and I have a divergence of fundamental world view. You lay the problems of the world on the exploitation that has occurred throughout history. I will say there are major fallacies in your basic thesis, but while it is a discussion that should be continued, it does not belong here.
Hitler used "Discernment" in order to justify the slaughter of over six million human beings. Every human bigotry can be traced to some secret "discernment" held. When our judgments and discernments are unchallengeable, atrocities can follow, whether by our own action or by our lack of action.
Also, I find your participation in these debates as a means of pushing your book as being suspect. You have persisted in using your "discernments" to categorize me, and then using that categorization to reject what I say. I consider that to be prejudice and therefore disrespectful. For both of these reasons, I will not continue to debate wit you unless you agree to refrain from self-promotion and offer me the same respect that I offer you.
Since that 'awakening' 13 years ago, my thinking has considerably changed, and I really do think that I have a 'better' idea than the status quo of 'Duality' think.
So as I have already indicated, I have to tell it all as I see it now, and I am not willing to spend my time going back and forth over trivialities of debate that will most likely go nowhere except someone feeling themselves a 'winner' ... etc.
I wish it were truly that simple that minds could be changed that way with any lasting effect. As it is, I do not have much optimism of changing the minds that seem to think along the FOX lines (and respect about that does differ, I have none, and the FOX fans have it all between themselves). To me that is a central problem in this world.
There are just somethings that stand out enough in the light of truth that I have already realized, which I am not willing to somehow accept that they are even debatable.
When I have what I know to be my truth, I will hold onto it. If you have a differing truth, you are entitled to it and will probably not be willing to debate it away either.
As I see it, the as yet undecided readers will be the ones to be helped decide their truths. It is them that I write for more than anyone else.
I had a very spiritual experience which is not understandable by most, and even less acceptable it seems. But I was 'told' by Spirit to 'tell others', that is what it is all about, and that is what my book is all about, and it is free.
People are also free to take it or leave it, or even argue if they choose. I will attempt to accommodate all to the best of my ability
Best wishes, have to go for now, j.
That was the right answer. You don't send more troops than you can sustain. The enemy would just withdraw until forces were drawn down. More soldiers would have been exposed to harmsway. Our $$ run rate would have increased. There is no gaurantee that would have been a superior strategy and would have exposed us to the risk of not being able to sustain the effort.
We are there to control the Asymmetrical Nuclear Threat to avoid being put in the position of being forced to commit genocide against a bunch of crazy evil geniuses. Laugh if you like, but many of us sorely need a history lesson. visit freedompressintl com to understand how big the bombs are and why we stepped into Iraq. Google Jahred Kammen for recent press releases. If proliferation is not controlled this country can and will be gone in a single afternoon. If you have the patience to read some of the material referenced below perhaps you will understand what actions were required and you will not hate your leaders so. Only Bush had the responsibility to protect you and your children. I am not willing to second guess him. I urge you to read below before shouting back.
We are in Iraq because of the need to control the Asymmetrical Nuclear Threat.
The bomb we dropped on Hiroshima used only a "pair of dice" worth of fissile material.
Largest US bomb was 1000 times larger - as big as Mt. St. Helens
Largest Soviet Bomb was designed 8000 times larger. They were afraid to detonate for fear earth would explode.
If the Islamists obtain fissile material the entire US could be taken out with thermonuclear truck bombs in a single afternoon. Read Trojan Whores ~The Road to Armageddon~. Search Jahred Kammen for recent press releases. Some better formats with pictures.
Pictures did not attach to discussion below. This is really serious stuff. We've spent 50 years trying to forget the past. The truth is not lost on Osama. It must not be lost on you.
Iran's Nuclear Enrichment Must be Controlled. The Asymmetrical Nuclear Threat is Simply too Great.
An open letter to my fellow Americans:
Dear Fellow Americans:
I am writing to you out of a sense of responsibility on an issue of critical importance to all of us.
This is a subject that has not been discussed openly for 50 years. Politicians on both sides are afraid of the issue and I fear that the few in our country that understand the threat are bound and gagged by the forces of our society today. We are divided politically and I believe largely out of ignorance. I ask that you take two minutes from your busy day to read this message and to consider my comments.
Americans have spent much of the past fifty years, appropriately some might suggest, forgetting how big and horrific atomic/thermonuclear weapons can be. The U.S. and Soviets detonated over 2000 distinct (all were experimental and developmental prototypes) warheads during the 1950's and 1960's. Very few of them failed to detonate. That was more than half a century ago. Materials advances since then make building such weapons today a far easier task. Why? Because triggering a thermonuclear warhead is all about "containment" - its all about containing the blast from an atomic trigger and exposing it to a larger fissile (or even non fissile heavy metals as we shall discuss) secondary in order to expose these heavy metals to the fusion process. Don't let the mainstream press and the "liberal elite" convince you that "Sand Colored People" are not smart enough to develop these weapons. And lets not lose too much sleep over spending billions on a new missile shield. You and I both know that when the big bombs come they will come not on missiles from Russia or China, but by way of Machmud Ahmadinejad and Osama Bin Laden or other terrorist elements that will drive large lumbering thermonuclear trucks through our porous borders and into our largest cities. If I can speak frankly, when this happens, you will not escape and neither will your children. These trucks will carry large, dirty thermonuclear weapons. They will destroy states not cities. A dozen or so of these would leave virtually nothing of the United States of America. If the Soviets could build these weapons (their largest design was five times larger than the primary blast at Mt. St. Helens and they built it in 100 days out of spare parts over fifty years ago), how can you doubt the ability of anti West forces or cooperatives to build them today, or if not today as soon as they are humanly able? Maybe it takes twenty years, but it is steps we fail to take today that could ensure their success in decades to come.
Let me freshen your memory or knowledge set on a few quantitative matters. Numbers sometimes lie, but they can also shed a lot of light on these fuzzy qualitative issues we deal with today. Lets start with the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima. Its name was "Little Boy". It used 13 lbs of fissile material - an amount, at best about the size of a baseball. "Little Boy" had deplorable thermal efficiency - only 1.4% of the fissile material was actually "consumed" through fission upon detonation. The amount of fissile material actually consumed by "Little Boy" would not have filled this pair of dice:
Those are simple facts that can be easily checked. None of us like to be reminded of this painful event, but this is what less than 3 Ounces of "deployed" fissile material did to Hiroshima:
You can call it a 9000 pound bomb, but it still contained only 3 Oz of fissile material. If the bomb had been housed in Kevlar and Titanium, In am sure it would have weighed much less. Some say it killed as many as 200,000 people. I'm a numbers guy and I can't even describe to you how little fissile material "per capita" that is. Its 1/67,000's of ounce. If that were gold it would be worth barely a penny. I think you and I are worth more than that.
Think about "Little Boy". Its important. Its called history and it tells us much about the threat that lies before us. Speaking of "lies", what has the "mainstream press" had to say of late about the Asymmetrical Nuclear Threat? Not much. Isn't that really the central issue of tensions in the Middle East today? Do you really think we spent all that money in Iraq on oil that we don't buy from them to begin with?
Lets get back to the numbers. In 1953 the U.S. detonated "Castle Bravo". America's largest bomb ever, it was 1000 times more powerful than "Little Boy". It took a picnic baskets worth of fissile material. Little more than a cubic foot. 15 cubic inches, (aka 15 inches cubed) to be exact. Castle Bravo was detonated over the Marshall Islands in the middle of the Pacific, not surprisingly where most of us couldn't see it. Its footprint was the equivalent of Mt. St. Helens:
Look, I remembered that much from my high school days and perhaps from even earlier in the days of the "under the desk" drills. But I was astonished in pursuing the issue to find that the Russians had countered our effort with a bomb built in less than 100 days and designed to be 8000 times more powerful than "Little Boy" the Hiroshima bomb. "Big Ivan", was designed to deliver 100 megatons and if it were able to detonate to scale (and of course large bombs lose much efficiency) it would by itself be capable of killing 1.6 Billion people. Remember those "big wars" people talk about avoiding?
What happened with Ivan? Russian scientists who built the bomb were able to get Khrushchev to dumb the bomb down to 57 megatons. They gutted the secondary and replaced it with lead. The Russian scientists were afraid the earth might not hold if the bomb was detonated actually detonated at full scale. (Yes, they were afraid the earths core might be compromised and the earth might explode - the earth is 90% molten lava...but of course "global warming" is our fault - but that's a whole nother' story! Chapter 24, to be exact.
So here is my point. If the Islamists obtain fissile material, we are not going to lose a city. We are going to be gone. Period. Three cubic meters is what it would take to wipe out America. A mere three cubic meters, using 50% thermal efficiency - similar to our bombs of the 50's and 60's - would contain ( I will not bore you with the arithmetic) more than 1,000,000 times more fissile material than "Little Boy" consumed. In theory, enough to kill 200 billion Americans. Unfortunately, even with sanctuary cities (welcome little brown brother! - see chapter 27) and porous borders, we only have barely 300 million 'citizens' in the U.S. But you get the picture.
What's worse, is that the Islamists et al don't even need to use 3 cubic meters of purely weapons grade fissile material. They simply need a dozen or so atomic triggers and bombs which embed such "primaries" in larger quantities of natural uranium or spent nuclear fuel. That's right. When the atomic trigger is detonated, as long as the weapon contains the blast for a nanosecond or two - the previously harmless natural uranium or spent fuel will morph to weapons grade upon detonation!~ Yea......free weapons grade fissile material!. The 550 metric tons we just shipped from Iraq and into Canada was far more refined than the $8 per pound natural uranium that housed "Castle Bravo" that morphed to weapons grade and made our biggest bomb ever somewhere between three and ten times larger than our smartest scientists could understand.
You see, this was all a big mistake. We did not mean to build bombs so big. Einstein tried to warn us, but at the end of the day that probably just made things worse. We built "Castle Bravo" and the Russians had to show us they could keep up. Problem is, after we've spent 50 years trying to get back to being afraid of "Green Micro Nukes" - the little ones the US and Russians deploy in practice today. Those are the bombs that emanated from SALT I and SALT II. Unfortunately the data set for big old fashioned planet buster thermonuclear weapons is still out there. I am quite certain this info is not lost on Osama Bin Laden and his henchmen Ayman Al Zawahiri (this frankly is the guy that scares me).
Big simple and dirty. Everyone knows that is what they want to do as their next "big thin" after 911.
Lets talk a little more about fissile material. Lets try to get rid of the "black box". If a dumb accountant like me can understand this stuff, lets not pretend our enemies don't, ok?? Here is the deal. I also happen to have a fair bit of knowledge about refining metals and mining industry. Let me make this as simple as I can. Uranium in most open pits it runs about 1% pure. That's actually very rich as most minerals go. Similar to copper. A good copper resource runs about 1% pure. In other words, in order to process typical uranium ore, you need to purify it 99% - it has to be 100 times more pure than the natural ore within which it is found in order to yield "natural uranium" and to be sold as such in the markets. Natural uranium is not fissile. Natural uranium is mostly Uranium 238 and sold for less than $10 a pound over the last several decades. Like most commodities its price has risen and is now roughly $65 per pound - almost 250 times cheaper than gold. But that's "natural uranium". In order to be weapons grade, the material needs to be refined once again by a factor of 100. Natural Uranium is about 1% Uranium 235 and 99% Uranium 238. Weapons grade processing pulls the Uranium 235 out of the natural uranium. A challenge indeed, but the Islamists have had decades to accumulate it. Have they been buyers? Hoarders? I don't know. I assume so. Judging from that huge open pit uranium mine below, I'd be forced to assume yes. We know that despite the mantra of "No WMD" Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Libya, Iraq again and Lord knows who else is keenly interested in weapons of mass destruction, or at least in refining uranium so they can build nuclear power plants in the middle of the desert. Virtually everyone understand how broad the risks of nuclear proliferation are, except perhaps the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream press. One only needs to discipline to pause for a very few moments to face that fact. But I fear that very few understand how lethal even small amounts of enriched uranium can be. I might suggest the risks are roughly 1000 times what most Americans understand. Our risk is not of losing a city. Our risk is of losing each other and of losing America.
Ok, so back to the Uranium Mine. Lets start with this Middle Eastern Open Pit Uranium Mine:
See all that bright yellow stuff? That's uranium ore. So we have to process that basically twice. Once by a factor of 100 to yield largely 238 and then again by a factor of 100 through centrifuges or other methods to separate the more volatile Uranium 235 atoms. Once you have "mostly" uranium 235 you have "weapons grade fissile material".
They say processing weapons grade fissile material is a complex process. On the one hand, I'm convinced. But can we keep even small amounts of fissile material out of the hands of terrorists? Would we start that process by not letting Iran become a producer? On the other hand, I'm not so convinced. The ore you see above is already 20,000 times richer than the ore you might see in an open pit gold mine. Gold is mined down to one half gram per ton in open pit gold mines. Uranium runs about 20 pounds per ton in open pit uranium mines. There are 31 grams to an ounce, so the uranium you see above is already 20,000 times richer than a comparable gold mine. I won't bore you with the details, but suffice it to say, separating heavy metals is separating heavy metals. Its been done by man for centuries. 235 from 238 a bit more complicated than some processes? I suppose, since the materials are dangerous and radioactive, but apart from that I'm not convinced. White men have done it for decades. I fear we are letting our ethnocentrism blind our measure of the risks. If we can do it, they can do it. North Korea did it. I know, I know. Just as with the case of Iraq, we gave them many of the materials and tools. Does that suggest we need to remain gullible and trusting of dictators and fascists? I am convinced that processing uranium it is not as difficult as we are sometimes lead to believe. Furthermore, while garnering some weapons grade material is critical; I've already demonstrated that the bulk of the thermal load can be carried by morphing natural uranium under fusion. Fusion is absolutely not that complicated. Its all about heat. Heat is easy. So whether our enemies produce small quantities of fissile material themselves or smuggle them from Russia, it should be clear that we need to do everything we can to control nuclear proliferation. I personally believe that whether held or processed in America or elsewhere, every ounce of uranium produced anywhere in the world should be subject to complete transparency and publicly inventoried each month.
Well, friends. I think you are getting the picture. It would require dearly little fissile material to make American "yesterday". Hitler was a madman. Ahmadinejad is a madman. Saddam's "Baathe" party and the Islamists are, as many of you may know, direct descendents of the Nazi party. They were established in the 1930's as an extension of the same. They share their hatred for the last 16 million Jews on this planet. They want to destroy each living Jew and they want to destroy the "Great Satan" - your America. They want to destroy your children.
I am gravely concerned that if we do not adequately understand the threat we will not stop them. Stopping them will take vigilance.
I urge you to forward this message to all those you love and wish to protect. This message will go at best to 2000 recipients and I need your help in getting the message properly distributed. You remember the concept of "Six degrees of separation". If we all share this message a good number of Americans will have a chance to view the facts and judge for themselves. That is all I can ask.
Further information on this subject is included at my website.
www.freedompressintl.com
I would also urge you to consider ordering my new book. Trojan Whores ~The Road to Armageddon ~a Prophetic Retrospective by Jahred Kammen, the Last Liberal. Buying the book will help fund my effort of making this information common knowledge to all Americans. I know the title is a bit edgy, but its really a joyous and uplifting read. The TW reference is aimed at the Code Pink types within our society who I feel put us at risk. I know they are well intended and God Bless each of them. If we were all as good as they'd like us be we would not have to concern ourselves with such issues. Also please understand the term "Islamist" is a term reserved for those who consider each of your children "Infidels" and want to see them dead. In my book I pay tribute to Mohammed Ali and a number of great Muslims and I mean no offense but instead pray for a religion that has lost its way and stands victimized, not unlike ourselves, to the acts of evil men.
Best Wishes,
My thanks in advance for your help with this effort. Please read my book. Only then will you understand what is truly at risk and how fragile our environment is. I also take the liberty of providing the following link to our recent press release:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/freedompressintl/theroadtoarmageddon/prweb1116204.htm
J. D. Russell, President
Freedom Press International
Sample Chapters attached!