Talk:Iraqi aluminum tubes

message: This article perhaps should be renamed to something like Aluminum tubes (Iraq) or Aluminum tubes and atomic weapons in Iraq or something like this; the title as it stands now is misleading, since it does not tell you what the article is about. It rather suggests that it is about the technology of aluminum tubes as such (whether or not such a subject deserves an article on its own). Instead, it is about a particular piece of evidence that has to do with invasion of Iraq, and this should be reflected in the title. 131.111.8.97 00:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. John Broughton 18:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. --Tbeatty 03:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I too would like a rename, although perhaps for slightly different reasons. The metal in question is 'aluminium', not 'aluminum'; this latter is an American parochialism not shared by the rest of the English-speaking world, and it is merely a question of pronunciation. The etymological development of the word has occurred in isolation in the USA, and given that the article is in fact a discussion of the events surrounding the correct usage of technical items I think it would be best if those items were referred to by their correct names. BlackMarlin (talk) 17:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A rename would be sensible 

message: I think it's clear that there was dissenting views in the CIA about the intended use (although like all the other agencies), the centrifuge use couldn't be ruled out. The report to congress shows the dissenting view of the intended use.
Also it seems some of the rest of the article confuses "intended use" with "possible use." I believe all the agencies agreed that these tubes could be made to enrich uranium. The discrepancy and controversy is whether they were intended for this purpose. --Tbeatty 03:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think the conclusion needs some rewrite 

message: this section could use some work. the last line in this section is redundant. but the section leaves the reader stratching his/her head. it needs to be expanded and made more readable.Anthonymendoza 15:45, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Continuing controversy

message: You know why Wikipedia is awesome? You know why the authors of wikipedia are awesome? You know why you guys and gals who worked on this article are awesome?
Because a sap like me can be sitting somewhere out there in the world, get to thinking for a moment about "aluminum tubes," and go to wikipedia and type in "aluminum tubes," and find this article. Someone even went to the trouble to redirect "aluminum tubes" to "Iraqi aluminum tubes order."
So, thank you all very much. You're making the world a better place. 66.188.6.131 05:26, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Thank you to the Editors

message: In early 2001, Iraq had been caught trying to clandestinely procure sixty thousand high-strength aluminum tubes manufactured to extraordinary tight tolerances. The tubes were seized in the Middle East. The Iraqi agent tried in vain to get the tubes released, claiming they were to be used in Lebanon to make race car components. Whatever their intended use, under UN sanctions, Saddam was prohibited from acquiring the tubes for any purpose. All agencies agreed that these tubes could be modified to make centrifuge rotors used in a nuclear program. CIA analysts believed that these tubes were intended for the enrichment of uranium. Others thought they were intended to make rockets. To test the theory, CIA brought together a “red team” of highly experienced experts from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory—people who had actually built centrifuges. Their assessment was that the tubes were more suited for nuclear use than for anything else. The Department of Energy’s representative at the NFIB delivered his agency’s assessment that the tubes were probably not part of a nuclear program. He was not a technical expert, however, and, despite being given several opportunities, he was unable to explain the basis of his department’s view in anything approaching a convincing manner.
This would seem to cast some doubt on the conclusion from the DOE's study as the authors of the study were saying one thing and the DOE overseer was saying something contradictory. Thoughts? Hempbilly 14:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tenet's Comments

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iraqi aluminum tubes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205194352/http://abqtrib.com/news/2006/sep/11/wilson-i-probed-iraq-proof/ to http://abqtrib.com/news/2006/sep/11/wilson-i-probed-iraq-proof/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Iraqi aluminum tubes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020023106/http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/08/iraq.debate/ to http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/08/iraq.debate/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060912223357/http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/fox.htm to http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/fox.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060930043217/https://www.odci.gov/cia/reports/721_reports/jan_jun2002.html to https://www.odci.gov/cia/reports/721_reports/jan_jun2002.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101115185028/http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0330nj1.htm to http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0330nj1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930152450/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/pdf/s108-301/sec3.pdf to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/pdf/s108-301/sec3.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060930043217/https://www.odci.gov/cia/reports/721_reports/jan_jun2002.html to https://www.odci.gov/cia/reports/721_reports/jan_jun2002.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified