Larry Elder: Were we misled? (about Iraq's WMD)

Washington Times ^ | Feb. 7, 2004 | Larry Elder

[FairOpinion]

The near-pathological contempt so many hold for President Bush clouds their ability to put themselves in the commander in chief's shoes. On September 11, 2001, more than 3,000 people lost their lives in terrorist attacks in America. Meanwhile, Saddam Hussein continued to defy United Nations Security Council resolutions to come clean. He flouted the U.N.-sponsored Oil-for-Food program, diverting the money from its intended purpose.

[FairOpinion]

This is just a small list.

Just for fun, here are some excerpts from Scott Ritter's testimony in front of Congress on Sept. 3, 1998, after the inspectors were kicked out of Iraq:

"Iraq today is not disarmed, and remains an ugly threat to its neighbors and to world peace.

...verifiable disarmament of Iraq so that neither we nor Iraq's neighbors in the Middle East will be threatened by Saddam Hussein's nuclear, chemical or biological weapons or long-range ballistic missiles capable of delivering such weapons.

But what I can say is that we have clear evidence that Iraq is retaining prohibited weapons capabilities in the fields of chemical, biological and ballistic- missile delivery systems of a range of greater than 150 kilometers. And if Iraq has undertaken a concerted effort run at the highest levels inside Iraq to retain these capabilities, then I see no reason why they would not exercise the same sort of concealment efforts for their nuclear programs.

My understanding of the -- first of all, I'd need to make clear that the issue of the discovery of weaponized VX in Iraq was done by another team, a team that I was not directly associated with. I'm familiar with their work. It's a very important discovery. It's one that shows clearly that, A, Iraq has not disarmed, and they've lied across the board about not just VX, but once we get to the bottom of the VX issue, we'll find it exposes additional lies, which cause concern for a number weapons issues. When that issue became public in June of 1998, I believe that the administration was forced to endorse the findings that indeed there was weaponized VX in Iraq today, and as such, they expressed support for continued inspection operations in Iraq to disclose not only the VX but all aspects of Iraq's retained weapons capabilities.

MR. RITTER: They're -- Iraq has positioned itself today that once effective inspection regimes have been terminated, Iraq will be able to reconstitute the entirety of its former nuclear, chemical and ballistic missile delivery system capabilities within a period of six months.

MR. RITTER: The Special Commission has intelligence information, which indicates that components necessary for three nuclear weapons exist, lacking the fissile material. Yes, sir.

SEN. MCCAIN: So that means to you that in what period of time, if these inspections cease, that Saddam Hussein will have that nuclear capability?

MR. RITTER: It's a question of how he chooses to acquire enriched uranium, either through indigenous enrichment or through procurement from abroad. If it's indigenous, it would take some time because the IAEA has effectively dismantled the internal enrichment -- but they have not dismantled the weaponization program per se.

SEN. MCCAIN: So what period of time are you talking about, roughly?

MR. RITTER: For a total reconstruction, it would be a period of several years to reconstruct enrichment capability. Yes, sir.

SEN. MCCAIN: And the biological and chemical?

MR. RITTER: That's a much less time frame. I believe within a period of six months Iraq could reconstitute its biological-weapons and chemical-weapons capability.

SEN. MCCAIN: And the missiles to deliver them?

MR. RITTER: Within a period of six months. We know in fact that Iraq has a plan to have a breakout scenario for reconstitution of long-range ballistic missiles within six months of the "go" signal from the president of Iraq.

SEN. MCCAIN: So it is your opinion that if these inspections are further emasculated, then within a six-month period of time, Saddam Hussein would have the capability to deliver a weapon of mass destruction?

MR. RITTER: Yes, sir.

http://www.ceip.org/programs/npp/ritter.htm

[FairOpinion]

And look what Kerry said during the Scott Ritter hearing in 1998 ( see Ritter excerpts in my post 1).

Excerpt of Kerry's statement:

KERRY: "You know, Saddam Hussein has got to be delighted with what he's hearing here today and what he's seen in the last days, because he's winning. His strategy is working. Make no mistake about it, his strategy is not to lift the sanctions. His strategy is to build weapons of mass destruction. And his strategy has been able to nip away at UNSCOM over the course of months so that he's created sanctions fatigue among our allies, who also have a different set of international or national interpretation of interest here. And the fact is that our administration recognized some time ago that it had great difficulty building the coalition to support what was necessary to let Major Ritter and his team do what they do. "

The issue is much bigger than that. If Scott Ritter and his team can't get in, then the fundamental accepted policy of our country and of the Security Council, to be able to enforce the notion that Saddam Hussein will not have weapons of mass destruction, is ineffective. And I think that's exactly what Major Ritter is trying to tell us, and has put his job on the line in order to emphasize.

Testimony of Scott Ritter, former UNSCOM Inspector before the U.S. Senate. September 3, 1998

[FairOpinion]

And here is Sen. Inhofe -- also during the same Ritter hearing:

INHOFE: "You remember, nine months before Desert Storm, Saddam (Hussein ?) said -- and this is a quote: "Our missiles cannot reach Washington. If they could reach Washington, we would strike." Then shortly after the cease-fire, a statement that was made that, "If we had held off and not gone into Kuwait for five or six more years, we would have the missiles, the means of delivering the weapons that we have to deter the United States." Do you remember those statements?

MR. RITTER: Yes, sir.

SEN. INHOFE: Do you think, in your evaluation of the type of person that Saddam Hussein is, that he would hesitate in any way from using a weapon of mass destruction and delivering it to the United States, if he had the capability?

MR. RITTER: My experience with the Iraqi government is that it is a ruthless government and that it would carry out such a task if that was the decision of the president of Iraq.

http://www.ceip.org/programs/npp/ritter.htm

[George W. Bush]

Not sure if FReepers loathe McStain or Ritter more. Heh-heh.

that Iraq admitted making 8,500 liters (8.5 tons) of anthrax, which if reduced to powder, could fill a dozen easily portable suitcases

Something about this doesn't sound exactly right.

I always thought when we said nukes, we meant the bombs, not the vast tonnage or even the yellow cake intermediary. And when we say anthrax, we mean weaponized anthrax. And when we speak of nerve gas, it's actual gas that's ready to be used.

In Ritter's remarks, I'm not sure what the exact difference between regular VX and 'weaponized VX' is.

[FairOpinion]

May want to ping your list -- good quotes about knowledge of Iraq's WMD.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Oh....just Outstanding work, Fairopinion , to pull these statements together!

[FairOpinion]

The point is that in 1998 Ritter testified about Saddam's WMD and danger to the world (that was before he wante crazy and/or got paid off by Saddam), and all Senators, including Democrats, including Kerry, expressed conviction about Saddam's WMD.

The point about Saddam's nukes is that he had everything, except the actual fissile material, which he could either work on producing himself, or just buy it on the extensive black market.

As for weaponized VX vs. "regular", I think the weaponized VX is when it's actually loaded into shells to be fired, but "regular" VX could be used by terrorists, releasing it in various places.

[FairOpinion]

Well, Larry Elder did a good job of starting it, then I remembered the Ritter testimony and when I looked it up, found that there are even more good quotes there, then I remembered, including Kerry's statement.

[mercy]

Mislead Schmislead!

Why will no one just come out and speak the obvious truth? We have placed an unstopable military force in the geopolitical heart of Central Asia and forced the balance of power in the direction we wish for the Middle East. Islam must be reckoned with in the interests of our (the West) survival. There is no question of right or wrong here. It is simply geo-political necessity. Oil must flow for the modern world to continue. Islam will stop that flow if not curtailed. It was not really about Sadam. He just gave us a convenient opening.

If we pull back from this it will be exactly the same as Somallia. Islam will be magnified ten fold.

The demoRats are toying with the peace and security of the western world in their attemp to regain power. Larry Elder helping them is sickening.

[mercy]

Correction: Larry Elder helping them with his title for this article is sickening. He should have titled it: WE WERE NOT MISLEAD!

[FairOpinion]

You only read the title.

Read the entire article.

Larry Elder is proving exactly the opposite -- that's why he put the title as a question.

He is making the very point, by listing a number of quotes, that everyone knew that Saddam had WMD and said so.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

What Kerry is doing and saying is just baffling to me?

He must believe the flock he is appealing to are dumb as bricks!

[NormsRevenge]

Bump

[TheEaglehasLanded]

bttt

[Liberty Valance]

Great work FO !

Bump

W'04

[thoughtomator]

Kerry is just as sure a method of suicide for the Democrat party as Dean would have been. Let's not try to express our glee about the situation until they're committed, this time.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I just built this set of links:

__________________________________________________________________________________________

!

Some serious reading:

PRESIDENT CLINTON VIDEO, December 16, 1998 Sadaam has nuclear arms, poison gas/bio weapons.

Statement of Senator John D. Rockefeller IV - On the Iraq Resolution - October 10, 2002

Remarks of Senator John Kerry on Iraq | October 09, 2002 |

Larry Elder: Were we misled? (about Iraq's WMD)

[Broadside Joe]

One other point that MUST not be over looked. When speaking of missiles with a long range, we need not think of Iraq's domestic production. Even before the war we know that Iraq was already in the process of acquiring long range missiles from North Korea.

So in light of that, it would not be too far out of the realm of possibility that they could also acquire fissile material from North Korea. That would reduce amount of time it would take to make a nuclear weapon.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

He must believe the flock he is appealing to are dumb as bricks!

Anyone voting Dem IS dumb as bricks.

[LayoutGuru2]

BTTT