Nothing to see here citizens, move on.
Posted on 01/26/2006 12:55:39 AM PST by mal
The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.
The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, "Saddam's Secrets," released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.
"There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands," Mr. Sada said. "I am confident they were taken over."
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
What a totally ignorant post....
I've been saying this since before the invasion of Iraq... it was obvious then and is obvious now. Of course people thought I was crazy, but I'm used to that.
Moved WMDs is not a wild speculation at all, given that it is the standard Russian client state M.O., and we have satellite pics of convoys from Iraq to Syria in the weeks leading up to the war. The very rational reasons for that behavior have been rehashed many times already... I suggest you go back and review what is known about Saddam's WMD strategy, and the fact that he did something very similar before the Gulf War, moving his airforce abroad for safety.
It would seem a pair or two of ladies' panties are what's needed to garner the information on their whereabouts.
I guess you've forgotten that Saddam sent his entire air force to "safety" in Iran in the first Gulf War. How many of those planes did he get back?
Naturally, WMD were never really the main reason for the war, but EVERYONE in the world believed they were there, and they were dangerous so everyone agreed it was safe to use them as a talking point. Nonetheless, I always cringed when I heard someone say "WMD" prior to the war.
Stopping nuke terror required changing world politics and inserting ourselves into that part of world. That was a fairly inevitable and predictable outcome on the pre-9/11 path we were on before. Preventing our families and civilization from being reduced to charred, screaming cinders justfies a lot. Most people simply have no clue, no clue whatsoever how close we came.
Stratfor.com has a lot more on this, if you'd like to check it out. The book they sell has the gory details; very scary.
Mr. LaRouche will never by president.
Saddam had, at minimum, 6 months of advanced warnings, thanks to the Democrats in Congress and media, that we were going to attack. OF COURSE, there were no WMD's there.
If you were in his shoes, you would've gotten them out of the country as quickly as possible too. First, to insure they stayed in friendly hands at a minimum. Second, to have the opportunity to retain them if the war turned politically, and you somehow remained in power. Third, to "lose the evidence" to provide a black eye to your attacker.
It would be nice if you could hear ONE ANALYST put two-and-two together, but everyone is too worried about preaching how "Bush lied".
Been on DU again, have ya?
Ping
I guess all the rest of us are pretty damned naive then.
How is a book written by a member of Saddam's inner circle "wild speculation?"
Nothing to see here citizens, move on.
I believe the weight of evidence supporting the war was based on Iraq's past actions, rather than on their potential actions.
Quite frankly, I think anyone who believes that a head of state would move his most effective means of defense outside his country -- while he himself crawled down a hole as an invading army toppled his regime -- is pretty damned naive.
I don't believe Saddam ever intended to use any WMDs against the US on a field of battle. Rather, their purpose was to establish his position locally as a major warlord and tribal chieftan, and perhaps to be used in terror acts at a time of his choosing. Indeed, he might have succeeded if Osama had not shot his wad on 9/11, as the world was leaning toward easing sanctions on Iraq based on the bribe-driven UN influence, after which time he could reconstitute the suspended nuke operations and recover his bio and chemical weapons from their hiding places. The events of 9/11 screwed that up for him, because it put the US into active mode against terrorists and thugs.
When Saddam hid his WMD and himself, I think he truly believed that the war would blow over and he would regain power. He still does believe that.
I'd also point out that this war was a dismal failure on the part of the U.S. if we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of U.S. lives over these WMDS -- only to have them spirited out of the country without our knowledge.
I do not consider it a dismal failure, since the goal of regime change has been accomplished, Saddam's nuclear ambitions have been foiled permanently, and the US has shown that as a nation it will indeed back up its words with actions.
DId a DU'er hijack a Freeper's account?
Me too, sigh.
Let's see, some possibilities:
a) Saddam didn't have any WMDs.
b) He had them but secretly destroyed them.
c) He moved them to Syria or elsewhere.
d) He hid them and killed everyone who knew where.
-Choice 'a' (the MSM's chosen position) is stupid because even the mumbling, bungling UN found them.
-Choice 'b' is stupid given the PR value he could have gained if he documented their destruction and then asked for the sanctions to be lifted-hell, he might've pulled it off.
-Choices 'c' and 'd' are far more probable.
But... but... they will be found any day now.... yawn....
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.