CLARKE IN 92: BUSH WAS LAX ON IRAQ

The Washington Post (BRIEF EXCERPT ONLY, IN COMPLIANCE WITH COPYRIGHT LAW AND LAT/WP VS FR] | JUNE 5, 1992 | R. Jeffrey Smith

[pushforbush]

bump for more Clark lies

[macc]

No one denies that WMD flowed to Saddam during the Reagan administration in the 1980s; everyone acknowledges that support of Saddam was a mistake back then. All Clarke is suggesting here is that, up to 1992, no one dealt with the problem. The question facing the Republic in 2003 was whether the Gulf War and UN took care of the problem by 2003. Apparently they did.

[Wallaby]

All Clarke is suggesting here is that, up to 1992, no one dealt with the problem.

You have to read more of the thread. See: Embassy Attacks Thwarted, U.S. Says; Official Cites Gains Against Bin Laden; Clinton Seeks $10 Billion to Fight Terrorism for what Clarke was saying in 1999. How could he be confused now about what Iraq had to do with the war on terror? He has yet to recant his claim that the "Iraqi nerve gas experts actually produced a powdered VX-like substance" at the El Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan.

[macc]

I did read the thread, but felt it was another example of questionable logic. The Clinton administration was deeply and rightfully embarrassed by subsequent reports that the Shifa plant had nothing to do with bin Laden or Iraq. Apparently the EMPTA the CIA had found in the soil is also a natural by-product of the farm pesticides also produced by the plant. That administration, Clarke in particular, was criticized for not bringing in independent chemical analysts and for hard-charging their way through this problem. It's true that Clarke hasn't issued any mea culpas here.
With regard to Iraq and WMD in 2003, Clarke is criticizing the Bush administration for relying on "dated" intelligence that was no longer reliable (nothing more recent than five years) and on cherry-picked raw data. Thus, the Post revelations actually underscore his critique.
My own point here is that there are a lot of conservative national security people who are really pissed off right now. There have been 5 counter-terrorism NSC Special Assistants at the White House since 9/11. This isn't your typical "liberal versus conservative" sort of problem. If conservatives don't deal with this problem well, they may start ceding national security "rationalism" to the Democrats.