Article

2003-01-23 Axis of Evil

U.N. Weapons Inspectors: Speech Not A Report

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2003-01-23 11:30 am|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 A question: Can Blix also be found in material breach of the resolution, in that he is not doing what the resolution is telling him what he's supposed to do?

At first, the 16 warheads DID look, even to me, to be a small thing. However, the point of the inspectors is to serve as an auditing group: The declaration said there no stuff at locations X, Y, and Z, so the inspectors are verifying that there are no weapons at X, Y, and Z. If there are weapons at W, and the report doesn't say ANYTHING about W, then there's nothing to verify.

The original 12 warheads are analogous to a firm's books not balancing, to the order of 12 cents. 12 cents may be small change to us, but it upsets financial auditors to no end, since that's the trigger for a required search for any evidence that the the books were cooked. Financial software goes through all kinds of mathematical contortions to properly round, handle, and account for fractional pennies.

We're talking about a DICTATORSHIP here, people. Would they knowingly leave their controls on their own WMD in such a bad shape that they are risking that their stuff would be pinched by their internal opposition and used against them?. Forget the yammering that they're a third world country: We're talking about Saddam being potentially attacked by WMD stolen from his own arsenal. You can bet your bottom dollar that ensuring personal survival is item #1 on every dictator's to-do list.

Posted by Ptah 2003-01-23 14:14:29|| 2003-01-23 14:14:29|| Front Page Top

#2 Slowly dawning on Blix that his little show is over,~~hijacked by the French~~ and that a speech may at least get him another 15 minutes on CNN.

Posted by john 2003-01-23 14:27:00|| 2003-01-23 14:27:00|| Front Page Top

#3 "This is far too technical a matter to bring up unless we find something sensational in a sample but I have not had such a report yet," Blix said.

This is like finding vacated medfly pupa cocoons and medfly shit all over without seeing an actual medly and insisting that there's no evidence of a medfly infestation.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2003-01-23 14:42:07|| 2003-01-23 14:42:07|| Front Page Top

#4 Ptah,

There are two distinct elements to both UNMOVIC and IAEA verification. The first is "accuracy" (is inventory A at location X?) the second is "completeness" (are there undeclared inventories?). Both accuracy and completeness have to be addressed before a conclusion can be drawn by either organisation.

Posted by Russell 2003-01-23 16:40:14|| 2003-01-23 16:40:14|| Front Page Top

#5 Russel:

Accuracy and completeness are also factors when auditors go over a set of books. When the books don't "balance", the cause is usually deficiencies in one or both.

I still feel my analogy stands, although different terms may be used. The model for disarmament, with examples, was given in Condolezza Rice's speech above. Iraq emulates none of them.

The resolution demanded a report, and they knew that the report was due and when it was due.

Posted by Ptah 2003-01-23 20:16:20|| 2003-01-23 20:16:20|| Front Page Top

09:06 Murat
07:03 Caton
05:07 Down Under
05:07 Ben
04:58 Mike
04:50 Ben
04:37 Ptah
04:24 Ptah
04:18 Ptah
03:04 Murat
23:15 Nero
22:33 Fred
22:30 Denny
22:28 Fred
22:18 Denny
21:19 Chuck
21:07 Chuck
21:02 Anonymous
20:54 Ptah
20:45 Frank G
20:39 Ptah
20:36 Alaska Paul
20:33 Frank G
20:23 Alaska Paul