Saddam's WMD Moved to Syria, An Israeli Says

http://www.nysun.com/article/24480 ^ | IRA STOLL

[mal]

Saddam Hussein moved his chemical weapons to Syria six weeks before the war started, Israel's top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom says.

The assertion comes as President Bush said yesterday that much of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was incorrect.

The Israeli officer, Lieutenant General Moshe Yaalon, asserted that Saddam spirited his chemical weapons out of the country on the eve of the war. "He transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria," General Yaalon told The New York Sun over dinner in New York on Tuesday night. "No one went to Syria to find it."

[Quilla]

CENTCOM cites Russian Special Forces and intelligence troops worked with Saddam's intelligence service moving weapons and material to Syria, Lebanon and possibly Iran.

From Bill Gertz in The Washington Times::

2 Russian generals given awards in Iraq on war eve

Snip:

"The mission and the reason the generals received the awards were not disclosed in the April 2, 2003, report. However, Gen. Achalov told the newspaper that he 'didn't fly to Baghdad to drink coffee.'"

Snip:

"John A. Shaw, deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said this week that two European intelligence services have obtained documentary evidence indicating Russian spetsnaz, or special forces, troops were involved in a covert program to shred documents on Russian arms sales to Iraq, and to move weapons out of the country to Syria, Lebanon and possibly Iran. "

[plain talk]

As long as the WMD are buried, they aren't going to hurt anyone.

??? We don't know where they are so it's presumptous to make this statement. They may be in the hands of terrorists for all we know.

[SevenMinusOne]

Why has the administration refused to make this case?

Because our Military and our CIC know much more about Saddam's WMD program (or lack thereof of any up and running WMD program) then does this Israeli -

The WMD equation was merely one reason out of more then a dozen on why we needed to move on removing Saddam from power. The World (and America) are safer because of our actions.

However with that said the case still remains that Saddam did not posses the up and running WMD program we suspected to find at the start of OIF (in 2003) - Nor does it appear that he had an updated and operational WMD program going during the late 90's into 2003 like we suspected he did (like the World suspected he did).

But regardless he was a threat and needed to be removed post 9-11 (al Qeade did not posses WMDs on Sept 11th....but would anyone seriously try and deny that they weren't a threat??).

[MaDeuce]

"Why has the administration refused to make this case?"

The reports of large convoys to Syria are true. I have heard enough information about it form folks I know who have been in the military (and it doesn't take a Genni's to figure what Saddam was going to do with them anyway).

1. Because (like others have said) we would then be obligated to attack Syria.

2. and more important, the WMD were move with help from the Russians who sold Iraq the technology and materials. If these weapons were discovered by the US with Russian fingerprints all over them, then there would be a REAL BIG mess and we would have to do something about the Ruskies.

[LilDarlin]

Prove it....just prove it!

[coconutt2000]

Why has the administration refused to make this case?

President Bush probably wants to avoid giving Liberals the ability to claim that he's making a case for war against Syria.

All accusations of the President's "rush" to war are known to be false by those of us who remember how long it actually it took. If the President decides to do something about Syria or Iran, it won't be an invasion, as much as he probably thinks it might be necessary in the long run. The President is far more likely to solidify Iraq's standing in the Middle East, shift focus back to Afghanistan's mountainous regions, and continue to revamp the intelligence and financial aspects of the war on terror.

[ASA Vet]

MI Ping

Syria still tops the "Next" list.

[gathersnomoss]

How could that be? We certainly didn't give them any warning and we rushed in as soon as we received approval. I am shocked.

Generals should run wars, not pu$$y politicians.

[stuartcr]

Is this intel, as good as the last we got about WMDs?

[ravingnutter]

The assertion comes as President Bush said yesterday that much of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was incorrect.

This assertion from the Israelis came a long time ago, it was backed up by satellite photos taken by our military. Heck, even the UN Inspectors and the CIA made the case.

Aug 2004 - Saddam agents on Syria border helped move banned materials

Apr 2005 - CIA can't rule out WMD move to Syria

Jun 2004 - UN inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD before war and after

June 2004 - David Kay: Saddam's WMDs are in Syria

Mar 2003 - Israeli Intelligence: Iraqi WMD 'possibly in Syria'

[Thermalseeker]

Because we would have to go to the places in Siria where they buried the WMD, and we want to finish Iraq first. As long as the WMD are buried, they aren't going to hurt anyone.

And, I suspect we have one or more of our spook satellites trained on the burial spot(s). If anything moves, we'll turn it into a smokin' hole in the ground.....

[dirtboy]

Why has the administration refused to make this case?

Recall that one criticism of going to war with Iraq over WMDs was that such an action would scatter them. Well, apparently, that did happen - recall that an al Qaeda attach on Annan, Jordan involving chemical weapons was thwardted and then fell off the radar screen.

So the Bush Admin, IMO, isn't interested in highlighting the fact that the WMDs got away. And the Dems are far too invested in the "Bush Lied" political attack to go down that road either. And when both parties are interested in a dog remaining asleep, no one wakes it.

[ravingnutter]

How do we difine WMD today? It is 1,000 or more killed by a single impact or 500 or 100 or 1 million?

Tough question...the Dems keep moving the goal posts and citing the "dual use" argument.

[jackv]

"Why has the administration refused to make this case?"

No kidding. That ought to be a serious concern. Not that there were none, but where did they go and who's going to use them?

I'll never understand this "no wmd" mantra.

[steel_resolve]

BEKKA VALLEY BUMP

[mallardx]

Well I'm sure Duelfer can't rule out the possibility that these invisible WMDs were shipped to the North Pole and Santa Claus has them now either. The reason the issue has been dropped is because it's clear the WMDs were just not there and hadn't been there for a long time. Of course maybe you've got some intel there the administration hasn't seen (being they are in the government). Maybe you should email it to them and ask them to discuss each point. The response you get should be a riot Of course I expect your response to be replete with important information that's been covered up by the evil MSM and links to WorldNutDaily and the Weakly Standard as 'proof'. And yet no one in the administration takes time to discuss this so-called evidence. Should tell you something don't you think? Hey, maybe Bush is holding the evidence until 2006 elections!! Yeah, that's the ticket...

You can hold on to your dream that the mainstream media is credible and truthful all you want, but you are headed the way of the dinosaurs. The truth will eventually come out, and the media and their allies in the Democrat party will be exposed as the anti-American vermin they are. We are right - you are wrong, and on the wrong side.

Honor and integrity are back! That is why your party has no power in the White House, or either house of Congress. It's gonna be a long twenty or thirty years for you losers, get used to it!

[Peach]

#1. Deulfer doesn't just say he can't rule out the possibility that WMD went to Syria. He says they have credibile evidence the WMD DID go to Syria.

#2. I understand somewhat why the administration doesn't talk about WMD in Syria. We are trying to work with Syria on various issues and to turn around and accuse them of illegally hiding WMD would make those negotiations difficult.

#3. What I don't understand is the reluctance to talk about what was absolutely known in the 90's and that's the relationship Saddam had with OBL.

[Matchett-PI]

"During the run up to the war,I clearly recall having heard mention made of an enormous amount of activity occurring at the Iraq/Syria border involving trucks,etc. In fact,I think that Colin Powell presented some satellite photos showing this activity at the UN. .." ~ Gay State Conservative

Jay Rockefeller went over there to give our enemies a heads up in time for them to get the evidence out.

In a report which might alternately be termed “stunning” or “terrifying”, United Nations weapons inspectors confirmed last week not merely that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, but that he smuggled them out of his country, before, during and after the war.

THE LEGACY OF JAY ROCKEFELLER

Jay Rockefeller (Socialist, Democrat from West Virginia, also home to the Klansman Byrd) TOLD SYRIA AND JORDAN AND SAUDI ARABIA that Iraq was going to be invaded!

Here is the transcript:

WALLACE: ...in October of 2002 in which you authorized the use of force, you went further than the president ever did. Let's watch:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROCKEFELLER: I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11th that question is increasingly outdated.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Now, the president never said that Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat. As you saw, you did say that. If anyone hyped the intelligence, isn't it Jay Rockefeller?

ROCKEFELLER: No. I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I'll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq, that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.

Now, the intelligence that they had and the intelligence that we had were probably different. We didn't get the presidential daily briefs. We got only a finished product, a finished product, a consensual view of the intelligence community, which does not allow for agencies ­ like in the case of the aluminum tubes, the Department of Energy said these aren't thick enough to handle nuclear power.

They left that out and went ahead with, "They have aluminum tubes and they're going to develop nuclear power."

WALLACE: Senator, you're quite right. You didn't get the presidential daily brief or the senior executive intelligence brief. You got the national intelligence estimate.

But the Silberman commission, a presidential commission that looked into this, did get copies of those briefs, and they say that they were, if anything, even more alarmist, even less nuanced, than the intelligence you saw...

More on this FR thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1521893/posts

14 posted on 11/18/2005 5:28:03 PM EST by Recovering_Democrat
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1524831/posts?page=14#14

[Peach]

That's a mighty good question; or are they all being silent because they are afraid.

I did read the scientists book who hid WMD in his garden. I've forgotten the name but "garden" was in the title.

[billbears]

The truth will eventually come out

Why sure it will...Bush is just holding onto the evidence until the '04, 06, maybe the '08 elections? That's why the administration has quit talking about it the past year. It's a secret, shhhh.....

That is why your party has no power in the White House, or either house of Congress. It's gonna be a long twenty or thirty years for you losers, get used to it!

I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. I am affiliated with no party. I'm too conservative for Republicans and Democrats are worthless.