The Real News in the Duelfer Report

The political spin machines went into high gear Wednesday with the publication of the report from the Iraq Survey Group on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The group’s finding that Saddam Hussein did not have a functional program for the production of weapons of mass destruction, nor any known stockpiles of the same, was treated as big news. In the context of a heated election campaign, the news was played as a devastating blow to President Bush’s case for the war in Iraq.

But this represents a serious distortion. There is news in the report, to be sure, but it lies in the detailed disclosure and documentation of how far France, Russia, and China had benefited from the United Nation’s corrupt Oil-for-Food program. These, of course, were the three countries most supportive of Iraq on the U.N. Security Council. That’s what the headlines should have been all about.

The Survey Group, headed by chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles A. Duelfer, only confirmed what weapons inspector David Kay had previously stated before Congress at the interim publication of the report: that Saddam Hussein did not at the time of the invasion have a major program for the production of weapons of mass destruction. If this is news, it is only because of the countdown to the presidential election.

What has been played down in the news coverage—but shouldn’t be, as it is of crucial importance—is that Saddam retained the capacity and the intent to restart his production of WMDs once the U.N. sanctions regime had finally crumbled. In this he was clearly in breach of U.N. resolution 1441. The Iraqi Intelligence Service maintained a set of undeclared laboratories to research and test chemical and biological weapons, including through human tests. He had the capacity to produce, within six months, sulfur mustard and, within two years, nerve agents. The Survey Group also concluded that Saddam still had dreams of acquiring nuclear weapons and that he intended to resume his missile programs, potentially for the delivery of WMD.

Amazingly, opponents of the war always seem to assume that had we not invaded Iraq, Saddam would have been content with the status quo, sitting in his box, as former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright liked to put it. But that would have been totally out of character. This is the Iraqi dictator who started wars against Iran and Kuwait, threatened Saudi Arabia, and constantly tested the U.S. and British fighter planes that were enforcing the no-fly zones over Iraq. Nor let us forget that he gassed his own Kurdish citizenry. Saddam was as restless as he was ruthless.

Nor were the U.N. sanctions doing the job of denying him weapons. Throughout the 1990s, Saddam was able to amass an estimated $11 billion in revenue outside U.N.- approved methods. Furthermore, as has been amply documented in the work of Heritage analysts Nile Gardiner and James Phillips, the U.N. Oil-for-Food program was fraudulent and horribly corrupt in itself.

As confirmed in the Duelfer report, Saddam bought support, particularly among French, Russian, and Chinese officials to whom he would donate oil “vouchers” that could be resold for large profits. One recipient was Benon Sevan, former U.N. officials in charge of humanitarian relief and the Oil-for-Food program itself. The scandal has gone all the way to the top, to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan’s son. Needless to say, the countries that benefited most from these vouchers were also the countries that were most adamantly opposed to the Iraq invasion.

Those who criticize the actions taken by President Bush and his team should answer the question what they would have done in the face of the outrageous bluff attempted by Saddam Hussein. He deliberately tried to make the world believe he had WMD, harassing U.N. inspectors and destroying monitoring equipment, and he succeeded. President Bush had every reason not to take a chance that could leave the American people exposed to the dangers of an Iraq armed with WMD. In the post-9/11 world, the stakes in the game Saddam was playing were simply too high.

"President Bush had every reason not to take a chance that could leave the American people exposed to the dangers of an Iraq armed with WMD. In the post-9/11 world, the stakes in the game Saddam was playing were simply too high.

This is what needs to be pounded home.

I personally still think, that just because we haven't found them, doesn't mean they never exsited. "

I think that if KERRY had attended the Senate Intelligence oversight committee meetings before 9-11, there might not be a 9-11 or a need to have gone into IRAQ. Kerry MUST stand up and take the blame AND apologize for having failed to attend over 70% of those meetings. Kerry absence and failure to keep the Intelligence community in a state of readiness has thus demonstrated his inability to lead or to be precogniscent, as he has indicated so far.

I have never given a Rats ass about the WMD's, after 12 years of defiance, this war had to take place in honor of those who paid the ultimate price in Desert Storm, 1991

If we don't enforce the conditions of surrender by those we have vanquished, than we should never go to war. President Bush was absolutely 100% correct in invading Iraq and removing Saddam from power. To hell with the WMD's and to hell with John Kerry

What's amazing about this article is it states that "no weaons of mass destruction have been found" by the ISG, but the ISG report, volume 3, page 30, on the CIA website, states the 53 chemical weapons have been found including 41 122mm rockets at a single site containing sarin/cyclosarin. I think I must be having a bad dream. AP lead story is "Bush admits no WMDs in Iraq" and the fact is there was an actual STOCKPILE, 41 weapons found.

5 posted on 10/07/2004 7:23:45 PM PDT by jmstein7 (A Judge not bound by the original meaning of the Constitution interprets nothing but his own mind.)

If the democrats were a serious political party, they wouldn't be running an anti-war candidate for president in a post-911 world. They are forever marginalized in my mind as the Sept.10th party.

All of those weapons were pre 1991, so the lame stream press discounts them. What bothers me is that after the end of the Gulf War, we every weapon was pre 1991, and Saddam was supposed to get rid of them.

But in all honesty, 52 Rockets with traces of Sarin/Cyclosarin is hardy a stockpile. Deadly - Yes, Violation of 17 resolutions - Yes, Stockpile - No

But these weapons should be talked about

Regarding sKerry missing 100% of Senate Intelligience Committee meetings following the first World Trade Center bombing, I hope POTUS asks tomorrow night "where was he" when America needed him the most?

There's a LOT of Evidence that Saddam's WMD was Shipped by 'semi's to the BEKAA vALLEY in Syria!!

I THINK THAT "America" OUGHT TO investigate "Syria" BEFORE we Ought To acquiesce to ANY Concept of "Retained WMD's" in Iraq!!

Most of us believe that "Syria" "Holds The Bag!!"

The Problem Is: The Sad Fools in Syria Simply are Incapable of Understanding that They have been DUPED!!

Doc

O.K., I just have to ask. These people are accepting this report as proof that Iraq didn't have any WMDs. The same people are up in arms because Bush didn't invade N Korea who has nuclear weopons, but he did invade Iraq, which does not have any WMDs.

These people are getting their information from where? Isn't all of this info coming from the CIA, the source of our intelligence on Iraq prior to the war? They are accepting this report and the intel on NK as the gospel truth, and at the same time, trashing Bush for using the CIA intel to justify the war in Iraq.

Why hasn't someone raised this question with Mrs. Kerry's little boy Johnny?

(Sorry if this is a bit disjointed, but it's late and I'm pissed off!)

I've been wondering the same. If the Intelligence on Iraq was wrong why should we believe the intelligence on Iran and North Korea? The Dems are trying to spin it that the President hyped the intelligence. What about the lack of intelligence before 9/11?

There was some statements by DEBKAfiles to that effect (WMD shipped to Syria) before we went into IRAQ. Bush has alluded to the possibility of that storage. Whatever, that is irrelevant unless the WMD are found. However, had KERRY not voted against the funds for Intelligence AND if he is as smart as he thinks he is, AND if he had attended the Intelligence Committee Meetings, he would have developed the needed Intelligence to have precluded the IRAQI War. KERRY failed to develop the Intelligence System to uncover the WMD or their nonexistence. Therefor it is KERRY who is responsible for the IRAQI invasion AND as KERRY was on the Intelligence Committee before BUSH was President. Therefore, BUSH relied on KERRY's statements as to Saddam's WMD.

I agree. Also KERRY's shirking his respponsibility BEFORE 8-11 in the Intelligence Committee gave rise to the lack of Intelligence that lead to the IRAQ War. Had KERRY not been negligent and absent from the Intelligence Oversight Committee, possibly there would have been no 9-11 using Kerry's own logic. Indeed, as KERRY was on the Intelligence Committee, BUSH relied upon KERRY's statements of WMD as he was on the Committee before BUSH was President! (Kerry's own logic.)

There is news in the report, to be sure, but it lies in the detailed disclosure and documentation of how far France, Russia, and China had benefited from the United Nation’s corrupt Oil-for-Food program.

But the French are so civilized and sophisticated..... Just ask f'Kerry.

...ISG report, volume 3, page 30, on the CIA website...

Can you provide a link to that part of the report please?

It bears repeating:

"What's amazing about this article is it states that "no weaons of mass destruction have been found" by the ISG, but the ISG report, volume 3, page 30, on the CIA website, states the 53 chemical weapons have been found including 41 122mm rockets at a single site containing sarin/cyclosarin. I think I must be having a bad dream. AP lead story is "Bush admits no WMDs in Iraq" and the fact is there was an actual STOCKPILE, 41 weapons found. "

Was the 41 from that road cut near Basra, where they found shells buried for a decade?

17 posted on 10/07/2004 8:22:18 PM PDT by cookcounty (Kerry: He began by trashing the VN Vets. He ends by trashing the NG. Such class is rarely seen.)

I'm with you...I'm so ticked off by the spinning and flipping-flopping by the MSM and the whole Dimowit party on this matter!!!
Their hypocrytical stands are so transparent to those who know better...but the % of the mis-informed is the ones who'll cast their votes for the guy that betrayed his brothers!!

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.