Posted on 03/18/2004 10:14:52 AM PST by presidio9
We now hear the argument that since weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have not - so far - been found in Iraq (news - web sites), there has been a massive intelligence failure, and we never should have gone to war. But failure to find stockpiles does not mean the ultimate peril did not exist. Far more important were Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's history, capability and intent, and the serious and long-term threat he posed to a vital region, to America's allies and to our national security.
First, Saddam had used WMD - against Iran in the mid-1980s, and he later used them against his own people, killing more than 5,000 civilians in the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja in March 1988.
Second, Saddam had possessed WMD, as he acknowledged to the United Nations after his ouster from Kuwait in February 1991. Moreover, until at least the early 1990s, U.S., British, French, German and Israeli intelligence agencies had underestimated his biological and nuclear programs. And all of them - along with the Clinton administration, the U.N. and both supporters and opponents of last year's war - assumed Saddam still had substantial quantities of WMD.
Third, Saddam had maintained the capability to produce WMD. In 1991, the U.N. Special Commission (UNSCOM) discovered that Iraq possessed a workable design for an implosion-type nuclear weapon though not yet the necessary fissile material. If the material could be obtained elsewhere - from Russia, Pakistan or North Korea - Iraq was believed able to produce a bomb within a year. Iraq retained facilities as well as teams of scientists and engineers. And during the past year, the Iraq Survey Group, the U.S. inspection team, discovered a program to develop long-range missiles. The overall evidence led the team's head, David Kay, to say "Iraq was in clear violation" of a U.N. resolution demanding full accounting of WMD.
Fourth, Saddam had the intent. After the withdrawal of U.N. inspectors in 1998 and the erosion of international support for sanctions, Saddam counted on being free sooner or later to fully resume oil sales and rebuild his weapons. He continued to menace his neighbors, brutalize his people and cooperate with terrorist groups. He told Arab journalists in late 2002 that he was playing for time in the face of renewed American and coalition pressure.
In the aftermath of 9/11 and as murderously evident in Madrid, it is far better to act decisively against the most lethal threats rather than hope to deter them or to retaliate following a mass casualty attack. As British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said, 9/11 altered the balance of risk. Ultimately, the nature of Saddam's regime, his record of aggression and his capability and intent posed a major strategic threat. Despite the bitter and often partisan controversies that have erupted about the path to war, the case for the use of force remains compelling.
Not to mention the fact that the U.N. was complicit in corruption of the Food for Oil program they were supposed to be overseeing, and that member U.N. nations were undermining the ability to disarm Saddam and search for WMD's by taking kickbacks. I still believe the WMD's exist. Hell, he had what? 13, 14 years to get rid of them or move them? And, he definitely had the capability to produce more, even if he had actually gotten rid of all the others. Saddam was easily able to bribe U.N. member nations through abuse of the Food for Oil program and lined his own pockets. Manipulation was second nature to Saddam and he put it to use in just about everything he did.
I heard from an Israeli source that the WMDs were sent to Syria weeks before the war last year and that they are now buried in a location near the Iraq border. This source has told me this EXACT location is known to intelligence communities.
Bio-Chemical Weapons & Saddam: A History.
It would be great if we sent an armored division like the 1st Cav in to dig them up in time for the election. But if they cross the Syrian border to do it, they better be there, cause coming up empty-handed would doom Bush at the polls.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.