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.......

[RightWhale]

Do you suppose this will be the 'smoking gun', or just a rehash of what is already widely assumed/known?

It will be a heavy document that will stun the reader by its sheer size. However, it will be a rehash.

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

"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?

Obviously, I don't know for sure that an extra two weeks' or a month's delay won't be precisely the exact additional time he needs, but, since we agree that he has been working diligently on these projects for many years, and with no inspectors to inhibit him for the past four years, a delay that would only amount to a very small percentage of the total time already spent might be worthwhile if the inspectors are able to spook him into having to hurriedly move some systems around so that our satellites might observe them. Having the inspectors visit certain areas is also helpful in minimizing the probability that such sites would be useful targets. Clearly, Saddam has the ability to move weapons around and hide them all over Iraq. It wouldn't hurt to know that professional inspection teams had ruled out certain sites. Like the old game of Battleship, knowing where not to strike is quite useful in determining where to strike.

A potential problem with reinstituting inspections could occur if the inspectors were unable to find anything at all. Daschle, Carville and the boys will be screaming about a witch hunt and spending all kinds of money for nothing. Realistically, I would be willing to predict it would only be a very short visit by inspectors until they either found evidence of weapons being built or, more likely, were prevented from entering a particular facility by the Iraqis. That would be immediate cause to withdraw the inspectors, and would yield some useful targeting information. We've waited ten years to finish this bastard off. Two or three more weeks is unlikely to make a difference.

[GVnana]

And do you suppose Bush will release a similar one at the same time, so as not to be upstaged?

No. Britain's diplomatic communication lines with other nations are older and more respected than those of the US. I'm thinking Blair will repeat his role of disseminating the indictment against Al Qeada, by making the case against Saddam to the international community.

Strange how this is stepping-up.

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

Fair enough!

[Grampa Dave]

Pity those who live down wind of Iraq.

[thedilg]

"A few more weeks of delay will not make much difference."

You can be certain that you are absolutely correct or absolutely wrong.

There is already or will be some day soon when Saddam will have crossed over the line which he says, "Now I am ready. I will unleash my weapons of mass destuction now."

The trouble is we don't know when that day will occur. Infact it may already have occurred.

What we know for absolute certainty, that if it hasn't already happened it will happen in the not too distant future. Each do-nothing day that passes brings the inevitable day closer. For sure such a do-nothing position will ultimately be wrong. The US will suffer mightily. 911 will seem like a child's party by comparison.

Godspeed, The Dilg

[BlackVeil]

Interesting list. Especially this point: "We're assuming that this war will be quick, easy and clean." Indeed, that is the assumption.

I would add another point to your list. We are assuming that the war in Afghanistan is over. But I do not think it is over until we are able to withdraw our troops, and there are many possible complications in the present situation.

[Uncle George]

Chamberlin had a dossier on HITLER too didn't he? He knew he was building warplanes, tanks, standing army, warships, all against the WW1 treaties. This all sounds like the same record being played over again, are the REAL British people all brain dead? Saddam is the same murdering psyco in SPADES.

[mikhailovich]

Not surprising. Once you've had Texas brisket, you'll say anything to keep it coming. Crawford may indeed have more to do with our allies than anything else right now. Could it be that mesquite wood was in short supply when the Saudi ambassador was in town?