IRAQ MINISTER SAYS SADDAM WMD CAREFULLY HIDDEN

Reuters ^ | 1/29/04

[areafiftyone]

(Updates with comments on Saddam's trial, Iraq's unity)

By Anna Mudeva

SOFIA, Jan 29 (Reuters) - Iraq's foreign minister said on Thursday Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, which inspectors have failed to find, were carefully hidden but Hoshiyar Zebari said he was confident they could be discovered.

"I have every belief that some of these weapons could be found as we move forward," Zebari, an Iraqi Kurd, told a news conference in Sofia. "They have been hidden in certain areas. The system of hiding was very sophisticated."

The United States and Britain cited Iraq's possession of chemical and biological arms as their main reason for invading the country last March and toppling Saddam. But no such weapons have so far come to light despite intensive searches.

Former chief U.S. weapons hunter David Kay said on Wednesday "we were almost all wrong" about the issue and it was "highly unlikely that there were large stockpiles of deployed militarised chemical and biological weapons" in Iraq.

But Zebari, on a visit to Bulgaria, said: "We as Iraqis have seen Saddam Hussein develop, manufacture and use these weapons of mass destruction against us. He hasn't denied that."

Zebari was apparently referring to the use of chemical weapons by Saddam's forces against Iraqi Kurdish villages in the late 1980s.

He reiterated the position of Iraq's U.S.-appointed Governing Council that Saddam, accused of sending thousands of Iraqis to mass graves, should be tried by an Iraqi court.

The former Iraqi president, who was given prisoner of war status, was captured in mid-December near his home town of Tikrit, having evaded U.S. forces since the American military launched its war in Iraq with a March 20 attack targeting him.

Zebari said Saddam's trial should be fair and transparent because it would be a test for Iraq's new rulers to prove their adherence to the supremacy of law.

TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY

Asked to comment on Turkey's fears Iraqi Kurds might seek a breakaway state, Zebari said there were no plans to divide Iraq.

"We have proved over the last nine months that all the Iraqis from the North to the South are committed to the national unity...No group, no party has any plans to undermine Iraq's unity or territorial integrity," he said.

U.S. President George W. Bush said on Wednesday he was also committed to a "territorially intact" Iraq.

Turkish officials have been concerned Iraqi Kurds might press for an independent state, which could boost independence claims by Turkey's own restive Kurdish minority.

The Kurds, who fought with the United States to topple Saddam, are one of Iraq's best organised ethnic groups after enjoying U.S-protected autonomy since the 1991 Gulf War. They have presented a plan to the Iraqi Governing Council that grants significant autonomy to the Kurdish region.

Zebari did not rule out the federalisation of Iraq as long as it did not violate territorial unity and added only the Iraqi people could choose the country's future political system.

[Atlantic Friend]

Well, that still does not make much sense to me. This time he knew he was going down and lose everything. He had no special assurance he would not be executed by the Iraqi people or in a war crimes trial.

He flees Baghdad to Tikrit. OK, that makes sense, because the Baghdadis would be more than eager to kill him, while up north he has not only henchmen, but relatives. But why on Earth, if he still has the WMDs when arriving in Tikrit, does he accept to be separated from them ?

To some Freepers, the weapons are now in Syria, because Saddam gave it to the Syrians. OK, let's suppose he's that generous. But then why is Saddam still in Iraq, while the WMDs were his keys to a safe passage into another country ?

[Coop]

This was a HUGE intelligence failure.

On the contrary, it's been quite an intel success, for the objective among us:

-We would not have taken Baghdad in three weeks had our intel failed.
-We would not have nearly killed Hussein twice had our intel failed.
-We would not have captured Hussein had our intel failed.
-We would not have killed Hussein's sons had our intel failed.
-We would not have captured/killed nearly all in the infamous deck of cards had our intel failed.
-We would not have known who all these WMD scientists were, nor where their equipment and facilities were located had our intel failed.

See, when you lay things out, these general "failure" statements really do appear rather ridiculous.

The only thing we can accurately say is that any presumed WMD storage sites proved empty upon being searched. That does not mean the intel failed. It could simply mean the perishable intel was not acted upon in a timely manner.

And keep in mind, you have no idea what true intelligence (i.e., not publicly released) is still out there. Nor do I.

[Arrowhead1952]

So, the Weapons of Mass Destruction which were used by Hussein to kill the Kurds were VOILA! just PULLED OUT OF HUSSEIN'S NOSE ONE DAY WHEN HE WAS PICKING IT?????!!!

Exactly. Either that, or the pictures of those dead Kurdish women and children were just "planted" by the media.

[HankReardon]

Why didn't the Iraqis have Chemical are biological weapons in the scuds that hit Israel during Desert Storm? Because Israel would have taken them out, all the way out, Iraq had no doubt of this. Israel has trump, and no one questions their resolve to exist.

[plain talk]

Well stated. My concern with this issue is the shallow reasoning being used for some to emphatically state that WMDs don't exist. I certainly don't know what happened to them. The lack of humility in such matters is interesting.

[ConservativeLawyer]

What is your theory(s) of what has become of the chemical and biological weapons we KNOW that Iraq had?

I have no idea. I'm as surprised as anybody that we haven't found them or found out what happened to them.

I hope that they were destroyed or hidden somewhere in Iraq so we can find them later. Because its frightening to think that they might have been transferred to some other nutcases.

I think the delay of going to the U.N. before the war gave the Iraqis additional time to conceal whatever the truth is.

[cwb]

What you say may be true...but remember this: It took 4 years after the Gulf War until we even discovered Iraq's Biological warfare program (1995). We (the UN) was preparing to give Saddam a clean bill of health until his son-in-law spilled the beans on that program. As one UNCSOM official on Fox put it..."we would've never found these weapons if not for the defector...they were buried in places we never would've looked." Now, let's be realistic...we've been in Iraq less than a year.

[HankReardon]

No, not you saying the WMD's were destroyed, please direct me to the documentional evidence. If I'm wrong, I want to know it. Help me out. You saying it doesn't convince me, does it convince anyone else?

[brewcrew]

Well I wish it would drop ... I'm getting sick of hearing these liberals screaming

Sometimes it's more fun to let 'em scream so long that they get themselves into a lather. THEN let the shoe drop.

[OXENinFLA]

President Bush Welcomes President Kwasniewski (Poland) to White House

PRESIDENT KWASNIEWSKI: May I add one thing?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Sure, please.

PRESIDENT KWASNIEWSKI: Because it might be interesting for American journalists. Many months before Iraqi action, I met predecessor of Hans Blix in Warsaw. I invited him to my palace, and we discussed about mass destruction weapons, Iraq and everything. And he told me very important thing, that Saddam has these weapons or is ready to produce these weapons. Because to have such impression that he has mass destruction weapons is a part of his doctrine to keep own power in Iraq and to be strong in the region.

So I think that it's very difficult today to judge how it was when he had -- when he decided to continue this project of mass destruction weapons. But that was information of predecessor of Mr. Blix in Warsaw, that absolutely Iraq is ready to produce if it's necessary, to keep the power of -- and the dictatorship of Saddam and to play such important role in the region.

[Coop]

Well, that still does not make much sense to me. This time he knew he was going down and lose everything. He had no special assurance he would not be executed by the Iraqi people or in a war crimes trial. He flees Baghdad to Tikrit. OK, that makes sense, because the Baghdadis would be more than eager to kill him, while up north he has not only henchmen, but relatives. But why on Earth, if he still has the WMDs when arriving in Tikrit, does he accept to be separated from them ? To some Freepers, the weapons are now in Syria, because Saddam gave it to the Syrians. OK, let's suppose he's that generous. But then why is Saddam still in Iraq, while the WMDs were his keys to a safe passage into another country ?

You ask very good questions and keep an open mind. I wish more approached this issue as you do. I certainly don't have all the answers. I expected Hussein to gas our troops near Baghdad, for the very reason you gave. In hindsight it appears he really felt his insurgent/terrorist approach, combined with French interference, really would chase us from Iraq and restore him to power. And the speed of the coalition success may have cut Hussein off from his WMDs stash(es). And had he used WMDs, he would have lost all international support and risked his entire country glowing green.

I agree it seems stupid for Syria to take possession of his WMDs, but it also strikes me as quite stupid for Syria to continue facilitating the entry of terrorists into Iraq with our troops just across the line. In short, I dunno.

[cwb]

Bingo! And even the UN...including Scott Ritter, admitted that they only destroyed about 95-98% of Saddam's stockpile. What was left of that small percentage was still a substantal amount of weaponry that, even as they said, could be reconstituted in less than 6 months. What happened to that remaing, accounted for, weapons?

[Ditto]

I am in the no WMD camp. Face it. A janitor in a WMD facility could become a very wealthy man right now by telling us where the stuff was buried. Some scientist who drank too much, could have told his wife where they are. To have a very active program, there are way too many people who know things. One person would have blabbed right now, either out of greed, out of spite, or out of fear of a very mean looking CIA field agent.

You are probably right, but also consider that humans have learned of the centuries how to bury things and keep them hidden. We have never found a burial place of any of the Mongol rulers for instance. They used a small number of people to take the body out on the steppes and bury it. Anyone they passed along the way was killed. When they returned from that place, all who were in that procession were then killed. King Tut's tomb, loaded with treasure was hidden in plain sight for 25 centuries and only discovered by accident. Similar methods were used there.

If it was hidden, the number of people who actually know where it is likely to be very very small.

[Coop]

does it convince anyone else?

Dave S said it?

Oh.

Well, I'm convinced. There are no WMDs.

[MizSterious]

"As for no one talking, there is still a question of war crimes. If I were an Iraqi scientist, I might tell interrogators that instead of using Saddam's money to produce WMD, I spent it on hookers and booze. I was fooling Saddam the whole time, you see. I was risking the shredder for humanity's sake. Yeah, that's the ticket. "

Excellent point, and worth repeating!

[petercooper]

It's not just the lefties. It's some Freepers also. Clueless

[Tricorn]

"Could be, but I don't think Saddam had much doubt about his survival when the Coalition forces approached Baghdad, though. At that point, WMD deterrence had failed, but he could still have used them in a punitive strike."

I would imagine that once the decision is made to hide these weapons it is not easily undone.

Anyway, the point is we don't have to SPECULATE about what Saddam might do with cherished weapons when confronted by a superior power. We know what he does with them -- he hides them, and that includes sending them to other countries.

[ConservativeLawyer]

I think the delay of going to the U.N. before the war

What I meant to write was the delay caused by going to the U.N.

[HankReardon]

I can suppose anything, doesn't mean much.

[Solson]

I agree 100%. The Intel failure on Iraq certainly didn't start with Bush. It started with Clinton and Bush inherited the mess.

Now it's time to recognize, at least on some basis that failure occurred and start to remedy the situation.