Posted on 10/06/2004 9:48:49 AM PDT by churchillbuff
Undercutting the Bush's administration's rationale for invading Iraq (news - web sites), the final report of the chief U.S. arms inspector concludes that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) did not vigorously pursue a program to develop weapons of mass destruction when international inspectors left Baghdad in 1998, an administration official said Wednesday.
AP Photo
Reuters Slideshow: Iraq
Latest headlines: · Report: Saddam Not in Pursuit of Weapons AP - 5 minutes ago · US to admit no WMDs in Iraq, but Bush unrepentant AFP - 15 minutes ago · Bush attacks Kerry over Iraq, economy AFP - 16 minutes ago Special Coverage
In drafts, weapons hunter Charles Duelfer concluded that Saddam's Iraq had no stockpiles of the banned weapons but said he found signs of idle programs that Saddam could have revived once international attention waned.
"It appears that he did not vigorously pursue those programs after the inspectors left," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity in advance of the report's release.
Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group, was providing his findings Wednesday to the Senate Armed Services Committee (news - web sites). His team has compiled a 1,500-page report. Duelfer's predecessor, David Kay, who quit last December, also found no evidence of weapons stockpiles.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan continued to maintain that Duelfer's report will support the White House's view on Iraq's prewar threat. He said the report will conclude "that Saddam Hussein had the intent and the capability, that he was pursuing an aggressive strategy to bring down the sanctions, the international sanctions, imposed by the United Nations (news - web sites) through illegal financing procurement schemes."
Saddam was importing banned materials, working on unmanned aerial vehicles in violation of U.N. agreements and maintaining industrial capability that could be converted to produce weapons, officials have said. Duelfer also describes Saddam's Iraq as having had limited research efforts into chemical and biological weapons.
Duelfer's report will come on a week that the White House has been put on the defensive in a number of Iraq issues.
Remarks this week by L. Paul Bremer, former U.S. administrator in occupied Iraq, suggested he argued for more troops in the immediate aftermath of the invasion, when looting was rampant. A spokesman for Bush's re-election campaign said Bremer indeed differed with military commanders.
President Bush (news - web sites)'s election rival, Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites), pounced on Bremer's statements that the United States "paid a big price" for having insufficient troop levels. On weapons, however, the Massachusetts senator has said he still would have voted to authorize the invasion even if he had known none would be found.
McClellan said: "The report will continue to show that he was a gathering threat that needed to be taken seriously, that it was a matter of time before he was going to begin pursuing those weapons of mass destruction."
Compare that to the words of Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites), in a speech on Aug. 26, 2002, 6 1/2 months before the invasion:
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction," Cheney said then. "There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies and against us."
On Wednesday, the White House also continued to assert that there were clear ties between Saddam before the invasion and the al-Qaida linked terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. But a CIA (news - web sites) report recently given to the White House found no conclusive evidence that Saddam had given al-Zarqawi support and shelter before the war, according to ABC News and Knight-Ridder.
The CIA report did not make final conclusions about a Saddam-Zarqawi tie, but does raise questions about the Bush administration's assertions that Zarqawi found a safe harbor in Baghdad before the invasion — and raises questions about whether Saddam even knew Zarqawi was there.
During Tuesday night's debate, Vice President Dick Cheney said "there is still debate over this question." But he added: "At one point, some of Zarqawi's people were arrested. Saddam personally intervened to have them released."
In a speech on Oct. 7, 2002, Bush laid out what he described then as Iraq's threat:
_"It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."
_"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas."
_"Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles — far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey and other nations — in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work. "
What U.S. forces found:
_A single artillery shell filled with two chemicals that, when mixed while the shell was in flight, would have created sarin. U.S. forces learned of it only when insurgents, apparently believing it was filled with conventional explosives, tried to detonate it as a roadside bomb in May in Baghdad. Two U.S. soldiers suffered from symptoms of low-level exposure to the nerve agent. The shell was from Saddam's pre-1991 stockpile.
_Another old artillery shell, also rigged as a bomb and found in May, showed signs it once contained mustard agent.
_Two small rocket warheads, turned over to Polish troops by an informer, that showed signs they once were filled with sarin.
_Centrifuge parts buried in a former nuclear scientist's garden in Baghdad. These were part of Saddam's pre-1991 nuclear program, which was dismantled after the 1991 Persian Gulf War (news - web sites). The scientist also had centrifuge design documents.
_A vial of live botulinum toxin, which can be used as a biological weapon, in another scientist's refrigerator. The scientist said it had been there since 1993.
_Evidence of advanced design work on a liquid-propellant missile with ranges of up to 620 miles. Since the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq had been prohibited from having missiles with ranges longer than 93 miles.
In drafts, weapons hunter Charles Duelfer concluded that Saddam's Iraq had no stockpiles of the banned weapons but said he found signs of idle programs that Saddam could have revived once international attention waned.
What about Libya?
THAT should have been the headline, not the BULL$HIT they used
This report couldn't have been written unless we had invaded.
Gee, no WMD...I wonder what he killed all the Kurds with or what the missiles with sarin gas were all about. How about the anthrax that was documented? Who in the heck hires/appoints these "inspectors", Hans Blix???
John Edwards had breakfast with the President Of The Senate one time three years ago. This is held up as proof by the Establishment Media that Edwards has been vigorously conducting his job in the Senate for the past 6 years.
By this same standard, if Saddam ever once sat next to a weapons program administrator for one hour, even on a social occassion, then he was vigorously pursuing WMD.
Then this report isn't worth the price we've paid for it (thousand+ dead, billions down the rathole).
confirm the Kerry position on Iraq
Sorry, a correction is warrented here. Confirm Kerry's LATEST position on Iraq.
Don't forget TIME's "Person of the Year".
Oh, sure, Saddam was not developing WMD. And John Kerry (aka Jenjhis Con, Live Shot, American Gigolo) is not running for President either.
Please. Your party would throw billions down the rathole to study aromatherapy candles if the lobby had the juice.
But I'm sure this line of attack will be hugely successful with voters who can't figure out how to negotiate a butterfly ballot.
Stockpiles ... I just hate when they use that word.
That means they found weapons but in their mind they were not stockpiles of weapons. Just disgusting how the MSM and others like to move the goal posts.
Of course here in Canada, the Lamestream Press keeps reporting there were no WMDs. Their talking points are little behind the MSM in the USA.
When you don't believe the previous CIA reports that indicated Saddam Hussein had WMDs, why would you proffer a CIA report that indicates he no longer had them other than to undercut the consistency and reliability of CIA INTEL ?
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.