Saddam dossier "in a few weeks" (Blair, - my title)

Yahoo UK ^ | 9/3/02 | Yahoo UK

[Mohammed El-Shahawi]

Blair: Iraq Is Real Threat Prime Minister Tony Blair has strengthened his support for a possible US-led attack on Iraq, saying the country "poses a real and unique threat".Mr Blair made the pledge whilst facing the Press at an open forum in his Sedgefield constituency.

"I believe it is in the United Kingdom's national interest that the issue is addressed," he said.

Constant dialogue

The Prime Minister said "America should not face the issue alone" and promised "the fullest possible debate will take part in Parliament and elsewhere".

"The rest of the world has a responsibility, not just America," he said.

Mr Blair denied that Britain and the US had yet made any decisions on the best way to address the danger posed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

But he said: "There is constant dialogue and discussion. We're in close dialogue with the United States. Iraq poses a real and unique threat to the rest of the world."

Telephone talks

"We are confronted with this reality and we have to face up to it and deal with it. The issue is, what is the best way to deal with it."

Mr Blair refused to align himself with US President George W Bush's policy of toppling the Iraqi dictator.

Instead, he said Saddam must take immediate action to comply with UN resolutions on weapons of mass destruction.

"Either the regime starts to change its ways, or the regime must change," he said.

'No doubt at all'

"The key objective with us is to deal with the threat. The key issue is Iraq continues to build up the chemical, biological and nuclear threat."

Mr Blair said he expected to publish a dossier of evidence proving the danger posed by Saddam "in the next few weeks".

"I think that when that happens, people will see that there is no doubt at all the United Nations resolutions that he stands in breach of are there for a purpose."

[Mohammed El-Shahawi]

Mr Blair said he expected to publish a dossier of evidence proving the danger posed by Saddam "in the next few weeks".

"I think that when that happens, people will see that there is no doubt at all the United Nations resolutions that he stands in breach of are there for a purpose."

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Blair says America should not have to act alone against Iraq -AP Breaking News
ED JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
(09-03) 07:30 PDT LONDON (AP) -- Prime Minister Tony Blair said Tuesday that Saddam Hussein poses a threat to the world and insisted the United States should not have to act alone, as international pressure mounted on Washington not ...

[TrappedInLiberalHell]

Mr Blair said he expected to publish a dossier of evidence proving the danger posed by Saddam "in the next few weeks".

Do you suppose this will be the 'smoking gun', or just a rehash of what is already widely assumed/known? If the former, I'd expect the polls to sharply increase in favor of war after Blair's 'dossier' is released. And do you suppose Bush will release a similar one at the same time, so as not to be upstaged?

[lexington minuteman 1775]

I suspect that the dossier's will be released at about the same time.The British Defense minister has talks in the upcoming week with Bush administration officials and i assume they will give him information that Blair can use to change British public opinion.I also assume we will release this to our people before the attack.Although i have a sneaky hunch that Bush may launch an attack first then release the info to show the "Why" we attacked.

[ex-Texan]

Even CNN is starting to come around albeit too slowly. When the Clinton News Network takes any stand other than appeasement it is a Big Deal .... and they did so today.

[Rokke]

That IS amazing news. What indicates their change of mindset?

[TrappedInLiberalHell]

Maybe they realized that they could use this war as a way to improve their ratings versus Fox News Channel?

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Times of London - September 03, 2002

Blair to publish dossier on Saddam's threat
by pa news and associated press in johannesburg

• Dossier will show Iraqi weapon threat
• No decision yet taken on military action
• Russia to veto military action at UN

Saddam Hussein presents a genuine threat which needs to be dealt with soon, Tony Blair said today.

The Prime Minister plans to make a dossier of evidence against the dictator available in the next few weeks. It will show that he is acquiring weapons of mass destruction and breaking United Nations resolutions.

He said: "I think that when that happens people will see that there is no doubt at all, the United Nations resolutions that he stands in breach of are there for a purpose....SNIP......

[Momaw Nadon]

Check out the Attack on Iraq Betting Pool

The pool is still open and predictions are still being accepted!

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Tuesday, 3 September, 2002, 14:50 GMT 15:50 UK

Blair to publish Iraq dossier - (BBC Online)

Tony Blair faced the press in his own constituency

Tony Blair has promised to publish a dossier of evidence against Iraq "in the next few weeks" as he gave his broadest hint yet of support for toppling Saddam Hussein.

Speaking at a special news conference on Tuesday, the UK prime minister said the Iraqi threat had to be tackled - what was under discussion was the best way of doing so.

The United States should not have to face this issue alone

Tony Blair

"I believe there is evidence that they will acquire nuclear weapons if they possibly can," he said.

Mr Blair stressed no decisions on military action had been taken but it was in the UK's national interest to confront the problem.....SNIP.....

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Blair gives Iraq stark warning

By Dominic Evans

SEDGEFIELD (Reuters) - Prime Minister Tony Blair has issued a stark warning to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein -- comply with U.N. resolutions on weapons of mass destruction or face "regime change". More...

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

While the danger from Saddam is palpable, it is not imminent in the sense that a delay of a few weeks before attacking would change things very much. He's had four years without inspectors to develop his weapons. A slight delay won't hurt, and it could help. If we send in an inspection team, they almost certainly will find some instances of the proscribed weapons development. This can only help in our targeting, which can begin immediately thereafter. Additionally, the very thought of the inspectors' return should cause some serious movement of Saddam's secret stash, and such movement might well be discernible via satellite, radio eavesdropping, or from spies we already (or should) have in place.

I am as militant as anyone in my belief that Saddam is an evil man who has repeatedly violated international law and is stockpiling weapons of mass destruction on a daily basis. Indeed, given the choice between allowing him to survive and dropping a neutron bomb on Baghdad, I would regret the loss of innocent life but would probably opt for the nuclear alternative. However, our choice now is not "if" we should attack, but "when." A slight delay that would give us useful insight into his weapons program, while having the corollary affect of squelching negative world opinion (to the extent that matters to anyone) seems worth the risk.

[Mitchell]

Ping.

[fivecatsandadog]

Although i have a sneaky hunch that Bush may launch an attack first then release the info to show the "Why" we attacked.

apprehensive BUMP

[adam stevens]

Why should we be letting European countries that are angry at us and want to see us fall see our evidence?

[citizen]

When the Clinton News Network takes any stand other than appeasement it is a Big Deal

Plummenting ratings = more responsible reporting, at least a bit

[Mudboy Slim]

"I have a sneaky hunch that Bush may launch an attack first then release the info to show the "Why" we attacked."

While I believe the case for Iraqi Regime Change has already been formally made, I agree that Dubyuh will launch the attack, then make a Nationally-televised speech to the Sheeple explaining the rationale. He realizes that the Surprise Factor will save American lives and is more concerned with the safety of our fighting men and women than he is about these Socialist Monday morning QBs who think can run the War on Terrorism better than the folks we have in place.

FReegards...MUD

[ex-Texan]

Change of mindset indicated by this headine today:

Iraq Has Tons of Chemical Weapons!

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

"A slight delay won't hurt,"

Really? How do you know Saddam isn't a slight delay away from being able to manufacture and distribute WMD?

[Jake0001]

I doubt it.

I imagine he'll try to rehash the same crap thats been broadcasted ad nausium for the past decade in a new light.

Don't forget your "Evil Saddam Bingo Card". Draw a tic-tac-toe grid and put any of the below in any arrangement around the center one which is "free".

"Saddam is trying to build nukes"
"Saddam has chemical and biological weapons"
"Saddam gassed his own people"
"Saddam finances the Palestinians"
"Saddam 'threatens' us and our allies"
"Saddam's Iraq is part of the 'Axis of Evil'"
"Saddam is harboring al Qaeda"
"Saddam sponsors global terrorism"
"Saddam is starving his own people"
"Saddam instigated the Sept 11th attack"
"Saddam threatens stability in the ME"
"Saddam / Satan could the similarity be coincidental?"
"Saddam plans on using his anti-aircraft batteries to shoot down Santa on Christmas Eve - thus the urgent timetable"
"Saddam has caused this recession"
"Saddam is the reason gas isn't free"
"Saddam invented and unleashed the West Nile Virus, AIDS, cancer, saturated fat, fire ants and chiggers on the US"

The facts are that Saddam is a two-bit dictator barely clinging to power. He has tenuous (if any) control over the north and south thirds of his nation. And if he does develop a nuke, how does he get it anywhere? His only good option would be to attach it to a scud (unarmed) and hopes that it arms itself en route and detonates close enough to its target to do its damage. Iran and Syria would seize it for themselves if he tried to smuggle it over their lands. If the Israelis see it, they'll take it out even if it means leveling Annan, Jordon. Over land through our "no-fly" zones? Right.....

The problems I see with this imminent war are these:

We're taking the battle to Saddam.
We're assuming we'll sustain minimal casualties.
We're assuming that we can stabilize Iraq with minimal manpower - when Saddam can't with all he has.
We're assuming that this war will be quick, easy and clean.
We're assuming that no external forces will interfere with our work.

Maybe Bush's plans and assumptions are good.......