Jump to content

A crying shame


Wingnut

Recommended Posts

Posted

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- You are U.S. Army Spec. Brad Young and you drive a tank. Before you sits a nearly pristine 1955 Chevy Bel Air -- maybe a handful of miles on the odometer -- straight from deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's garage.

 

You get the order: Destroy that Chevy. Young, a 24-year-old trooper from Clinton, Utah, follows orders. He runs over the car with his tank. In 5 seconds, the '55 Chevy is scrap, he recalls Tuesday.

 

Young's order came earlier this week after U.S. troops found what were believed to be Hussein's collection of dozens of cars, some, like the Chevy, American classics. A number of the cars may have belonged to other ranking members of Hussein's now-defunct regime, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

 

U.S. troops at a palace complex in Baghdad said they began destroying some of the cars because so many people have tried to take them.

 

U.S. military officials say they fear the cars could be used as suicide bombs or to create dangerous roadblocks.

 

Destroying the cars has proven more painful for the U.S. troops than for the people who wanted to take them.

 

"I love cars. It was so hard to see a Bel Air destroyed," said Pfc. Raul Carbajal, 20, of Chicago. "It was painful."

 

Hussein's palace complex near the Tigris River included two garages with about 60 cars, U.S. officials said. Among the cars: a 1917 Mercedes, a Packard from the 1930s, a V8 Woody, a 1970s Cadillac Fleetwood, a 1958 Ford and the 1955 Chevrolet.

 

Looters "went straight for the garage," said Army Sgt. Quincy Oree, 26, of Columbia, S.C. "They knew exactly where they were."

 

The looters got away with about 20 vehicles, Oree said.

 

Officials say they believe that some of the cars belonged to former Iraqi leaders, while Hussein purchased others as a hobby. Besides cars, the garages held golf carts and gasoline-powered buggies that were perhaps used to ride through the complex.

 

When the troops arrived at the complex a week ago, many of the cars had been set up as road barricades inside the complex, military officials said.

 

U.S. troops said Hussein's cars had not seen much use. Nearly all had fewer than 1,000 miles on them; none had much gas, and all had a key in the ignition. Many had dust on the outside. But inside, the cars were immaculate, Oree said.

 

Some of the looters grabbed the keys and left, returning later for the car, said Sgt. Paul Harris, 25, of Austin, Texas.

 

"Men in ratty clothes would come to the gate and say 'I am here to pick up my Mercedes,' " Harris said. "They would wave the key at us."

 

One man tried to drive a Rolls-Royce out of the complex, but it ran out of gas. Then the man wrapped a sheet around the bumper and tried to pull it out. He failed.

 

Most often, the troops said, residents approached them and asked for a car. The cars were requested more than computers, televisions, telephones, food and water, Oree said.

 

The cars were among the few things the U.S. troops have been destroying. They have been trying to keep as many things as possible intact to hand over to the new government.

 

For the article: Detroit Free Press

Posted
:eek:  But I could imagine being at a concours having a car and being able to say. "Yea its a one owner car, the owner was Saddam"
Posted

Saddam is/was a sneaky little bastard, trying to turn our troops against us buy putting American Classic automibles in prestine condition where we would have to destroy them... Where are the human shields when you need them :cool:  :eek:  :crackup:

 

 

 

Tom

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 485 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...