Text 16421, 108 rader
Skriven 2005-11-17 11:31:08 av Roy Witt (1:1/22)
     Kommentar till en text av Peter Knapper (3:772/1.0)
Ärende: Plates
==============

17 Nov 05 20:18, Peter Knapper wrote to Roy Witt:

 PK> Hi Roy,

 PK>> A very recent query regarding the "closeness" of the US <> NZ
 PK>> relationship had an "official" reply from the local US Embassy of
 PK>> "Very Very Good Friends". However that friendship does not extend to
 PK>> the exchange of any intelligence information that is not released
 PK>> for public consumption.

 RW>> I think that's all in the 'need to know' category. NZ being in the
 RW>> far reaches of space, so to speak, doesn't really seem to be in much
 RW>> danger of needing such intelligence.

 PK> Thats odd, because there was considerable exchange prior to the
 PK> "Nuclear ships" issue...

Perhaps it's now considered inappropriate to share these things with NZ
any longer.

 PK>> The sole "sticking" point in this relationship seems to be that
 PK>> nearly 30 years ago the NZ people voted to prohibit visits from all
 PK>> vessels that may be carrying nuclear weapons. As most Navies never
 PK>> disclose details of the carriage of any weapons, that precludes any
 PK>> US (and other nations) military vessel of any sort.

 RW>> Australians seem to have done the same thing, yet their country
 RW>> houses secret bases used by the US intelligence community. Wouldn't
 RW>> that require some US ships to import certain support equipment be
 RW>> allowed in port? Or is it all shipped in via KC135s?

 PK> The Australian approach is slightly different, they base their
 PK> banning of ships on the simple say so of the visiting Navy and do not
 PK> require a "certified" statement of fact. Its not easy to hide Nuclear
 PK> weapons on ships these days, as soon as they dock they can be
 PK> detected from a short distance, unless extrordinary measures are
 PK> taken to hide them.

Hmmm. I was under the impression that nuclear powered vessels were banned
there also. At one time, I lived on a mesa overlooking San Diego bay. I
was more concerned with the radar signals eminating from all those ships,
more than I was with nuclear vessels or weapons. (nuke sub bases, air
craft carriers and a fleet of destroyers, not to mention fighter aircraft
armed to the teeth)

 PK> Do you know if the US has applied some change to their nuclear
 PK> deployment recently? Such as only the subs are actually carrying
 PK> nuclear missles and no other nuclear arms being carried on any
 PK> surface vessels, except for specific "situations" that are known to
 PK> exist?

I have no idea and I'd bet that there isn't anyone outside of the top
Naval command who would.

 PK>> Chemical or Biological "Weapons of Mass Destruction" would require
 PK>> quite large "production" facilities to be considered as capable of
 PK>> making something "massive".

 RW>> And they could have been destroyed or moved to another area of the
 RW>> world.

 PK> They would stil have required large facilities that would have been
 PK> difficult to hide.

During the 91 Gulf War, Iraq flew what was left of it's aircraft to Iran.
They must have been on a friendly basis, even after 8 years of war between
them. Who's to say that they didn't secret their nuclear program to Iran
too? After all, Iran has just entered the nuclear club of nations.

 RW>> But the fact remains that large quantities of 55 gallon drums were
 RW>> found with the ingredients to make lethal gas (chemicals) along side
 RW>> of missles configured to carry same.

 PK> So why did the report come back that there was no evidnce of a stock
 PK> pile or the manufacture of them? Something just doesn't sound right
 PK> here...

I don't think all of the reports are in yet. Nor have all possible sites
been checked out.

 PK>> A Mobile Chemical Lab would not be able to produce a practical
 PK>> weapon of any significant size and remain mobile...

 RW>> They would if they made a rendevous with a collection point along
 RW>> it's way. Make a little at a time, but make a lot by using many
 RW>> mobile labs who dump their product at collection points on a given
 RW>> route.

 PK> There would still be evidence of some activity, but absolutely
 PK> nothing was found other than a few items "that could have been used
 PK> in the manufacture of such items", and yet those items were passed as
 PK> not important by the inspectors.

Well, there were things found that would support the theory. Barrels of
chemicals, that if mixed together, would form a serin gas, along side of
missles configured to carry such a mixture.

 RW>> Besides, RW> I love a good arguement.

 PK> Oh??? I hadn't noticed..........;-)

:o)


Roy
--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: Hacienda de Rio de Guadalupe * South * Texas, USA * (1:1/22)