July 23, 2004


I can't find anything in the news yet, but we had some excitement here yesterday. As they were doing construction work, they came upon a bomb...a WWII-era undetonated bomb. They had to evacuate the whole area and try to diffuse and move this enormous bomb. Apparently these finds are not that rare here in Germany, but it seemed exciting to me.

So I was thinking as I drove to class last night: That bomb stayed hidden for a good 60 years and no one ever knew it was there. But we're supposed to find WMDs within a year in Iraq...


My German co-worker found an article in the German news, complete with a photo of the bomb.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:08 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 1 kb.

1 When I click on your link at work, the "dragon" keeps me out and filters the site, which comes up under 'sex'. What the heck kind of newspaper is this? Secondly, you DEFUSE a bomb. If you diffuse it, well, that could be a bad thing.

Posted by: Oda Mae at July 23, 2004 08:35 AM (FmIVz)

2 Link works just fine for me...it's just the Oberpfalznetz site. Anyone else having a problem with it? And thanks for the vocab lesson!

Posted by: Sarah at July 23, 2004 09:21 AM (0+gNs)

3 "That bomb stayed hidden for a good 60 years and no one ever knew it was there. But we're supposed to find WMDs within a year in Iraq" hee hee hee that is too funny, just think in 2064 some people will come across the pile of WMD in Iraq and liberals will finally say "ok, so Bush didn't lie"

Posted by: Machelle at July 23, 2004 12:25 PM (ZAyoW)

4 Well, the operative word here ofcourse is 'hidden'. 'Hidden' (1) is the result of actively keeping something away from people who are looking for it, but since someone hid it, someone knows where it is. Hidden (2) is what happens after you riddle a country with bombs (usually digging deep into the soil) and build houses over the duds, i.e. you weren't looking for it. The second one is interesting, because the sarin shells that were found were of that category.

Posted by: Sander at July 23, 2004 03:37 PM (3nJmx)

5 I had problems bring up the article, but it was on the main page, so I finally got there. I love Babelfish. "Experts of the blowing up command ..."

Posted by: homebru at July 23, 2004 09:59 PM (+pY9j)

6 As I recall it was only a couple of years ago they found a hidden hanger under the Berlin airport. Can't build an underground hanger and move a bunch of fighters into it without somebody knowing it was there (without a lot of somebodies), but it stayed hidden all these years.

Posted by: Kalroy at July 24, 2004 04:02 AM (VU2TV)

7 Very true, Kilroy. It's the age old question of proving a negative. However, the case of the WMD's is slightly different. As you may recall, (1) Rumsfeld said they knew where the weapons were, (2) there were many defectors telling them about the programs, (3) there is no reason for former government scientist to not tell about them, also because there was and is a big reward, (4) many said (like Thomas Friedman) the UN inspectors couldn't find them because they didn't have unrestricted access (see also resolution 1441), so with unrestricted access (after invading) we were bound to find them and (5) the various commissions have concluded that (5a) pre-war intelligence was screwed up and (5b) that there was at least some sexing-up to bolster the case for war. It is very very doubtful that anything but some stray shells (hidden(2)) will show up, so I believe the most positive interpretation is: 'Great, Iraq was not a threat'. How this affects your judgment of the necessity of war, is a different matter.

Posted by: Sander at July 25, 2004 09:35 AM (3nJmx)

8 err... apologies, I mean 'Kalroy'.

Posted by: Sander at July 25, 2004 09:38 AM (3nJmx)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
44kb generated in CPU 0.0393, elapsed 0.1486 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.1245 seconds, 172 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.