Show This Column to Anyone Who Claims Bush Lied about WMDs in Iraq

Throughout the Bush years, liberals repeated "Bush lied, people died" like a mantra. That slander wasn't true then and it's not anymore true now that it has resurfaced. There are many legitimate criticisms of the way the Bush Administration conducted the war in Iraq and even more of the way Obama threw away all the blood and treasure we spent there for the sake of politics, but you have to be malicious or just an imbecile at this point to accuse Bush of lying about WMDs.

To begin with, numerous foreign intelligence agencies also believed that Saddam Hussein had an active WMD program. The "intelligence agencies of Germany, Israel, Russia, Britain, China and France" all believed Saddam had WMDs. CIA Director George Tenet also rather famously said that it was a "slam dunk" that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

"Incidentally, it's hard to fault the CIA for their conclusions when even, "In private conversations that were intercepted by U.S. intelligence, Iraqi officials spoke as if Saddam continued to possess WMD. Even Iraqi generals believed he did. In the fall of 2002, the Iraqi military conducted exercises in chemical protective gear - but not because they thought the U.S.-led coalition was going to use chemical weapons."

Additionally, many prominent Democrats who had access to the same intelligence that George Bush did came to the same conclusion and said so publicly. If George W. Bush lied, then by default you have to also believe that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, John Edwards, Robert Byrd, Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi and Bernie Sanders also lied. Some of them, like Hillary Clinton, even alleged that Saddam was working on nuclear weapons.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

Mr. Speaker, the front page of The Washington Post today reported that all relevant U.S. intelligence agencies now say, despite what we have heard from the White House, that "Saddam Hussein is unlikely to initiate a chemical or biological attack against the United States." Even more importantly, our intelligence agencies say that should Saddam conclude that a U.S.-led attack could no longer be deterred, he might at that point launch a chemical or biological counterattack. In other words, there is more danger of an attack on the United States if we launch a precipitous invasion.

Additional confirmation of this latter point comes from Kenneth Pollack, who served in the National Security Council under Clinton. "In the late spring of 2002," Pollack has written,

I participated in a Washington meeting about Iraqi WMD. Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the force established in 1991 to oversee the elimination of WMD in Iraq. One of the senior people put a question to the group: did anyone in the room doubt that Iraq was currently operating a secret centrifuge plant? No one did.

From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein's rule.

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

One of the reasons Saddam Hussein went to such great lengths to hide what he was doing was because he did have thousands of old WMDS stockpiled. However, that wasn't all there was to it. Even though the ultimate conclusion of the Iraqi Survey Group was that Saddam didn't have an active WMD program, his hands were far from clean on the WMD front.

...When Saddam had asked a senior military official in either 2001 or 2002 how long it would take to produce new chemical agent and weapons, he told ISG that after he consulted with CW experts in OMI he responded it would take six months for mustard.

Another senior Iraqi chemical weapons expert in responding to a request in mid-2002 from Uday Husayn for CW for the Fedayeen Saddam estimated that it would take two months to produce mustard and two years for Sarin."

— "…(O)ne scientist confirmed that the production line…..could be switched to produce anthrax in one week if the seed stock were available."

...With regard to Iraq's nuclear program, the testimony we have obtained from Iraqi scientists and senior government officials should clear up any doubts about whether Saddam still wanted to obtain nuclear weapons.

They have told ISG that Saddam… remained firmly committed to acquiring nuclear weapons. These officials assert that Saddam would have resumed nuclear weapons development at some future point. Some indicated a resumption after Iraq was free of sanctions."

"1. Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Even those senior officials we have interviewed who claim no direct knowledge of any on-going prohibited activities readily acknowledge that Saddam intended to resume these programs whenever the external restrictions were removed. Several of these officials acknowledge receiving inquiries since 2000 from Saddam or his sons about how long it would take to either restart CW production or make available chemical weapons."

The Duelfer report also noted that Saddam had every intention of making more WMDs.

"(S)ources indicate that M16 was planning to produce several CW agents including sulfur mustard, nitrogen mustard, and Sarin."

In other words, it is true that no stockpiles of new WMDS were found and the people in the best position to know didn't conclude the weapons were moved to Syria. However, had Saddam Hussein not been taken out, he would have still had stockpiles of old WMDs available and he had every intention of making more.

Given all of that, it's no surprise that everyone from the head of the CIA to Bernie Sanders to the British thought that Saddam had WMDs; yet George W. Bush is the one who is accused of deliberately sending American soldiers to their deaths over a lie.

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.
Dick Cheney August 26, 2002

Tubes â€œare only really suited for nuclear weapons programsÃ¢â‚¬Â¦The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly Saddam can acquire nuclear weapons. But we donâ€™t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.â€
Condoleeza Rice September 2002

â€œWe do know, with absolute certainty, that he is using his procurement system to acquire the equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon.â€
Cheney on Meet the Press, September 2002
â€œAnd in 1995, after four years of deception, Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf war.

â€œWe know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993.

â€œToday, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its nuclear program, weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, and accounting of nuclear materials and documentation of foreign assistance.

â€œIraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon.

â€œIraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminium tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year.

â€œAnd Iraqâ€™s state-controlled media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons.

â€œIraq also possesses a force of Scud-type missiles with ranges beyond the 94 miles permitted by the UN Work at testing and production facilities shows that Iraq is building more long range missiles that can inflict mass death throughout the region.
GW Bush to UN General Assembly, September 2002

â€œIf he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
Ari Fleischer December 2, 2002

The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it.
Ari Fleischer December 6, 2002

We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
Ari Fleischer January 9, 2003

We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.
Vice President Dick Chaney March 16, 2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.
Gen. Tommy Franks
March 22, 2003

I have no doubt weâ€™re going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.
Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman March 23, 2003

One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.
Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark March 22, 2003

We know where they are. Theyâ€™re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.
Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003

Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find â€” and there will be plenty.
Neocon scholar Robert Kagan April 9, 2003

I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found.
Ari Fleischer April 10, 2003

We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
George W. Bush April 24, 2003

There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld April 25, 2003

Weâ€™ll find them. Itâ€™ll be a matter of time to do so.
George W. Bush May 3, 2003

Iâ€™m absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. Weâ€™re just getting it just now.
Colin Powell May 4, 2003

We never believed that weâ€™d just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld May 4, 2003

Iâ€™m not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein â€” because he had a weapons program.
George W. Bush May 6, 2003

U.S. officials never expected that â€œwe were going to open garages and findâ€ weapons of mass destruction.
Condoleeza Rice May 12, 2003

I donâ€™t believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.
Donald Rumsfeld,
May 14, 2003

Given time, given the number of prisoners now that weâ€™re interrogating, Iâ€™m confident that weâ€™re going to find weapons of mass destruction.
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff May 26, 2003

They may have had time to destroy them, and I donâ€™t know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld May 27, 2003

For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz May 28, 2003

It was a surprise to me then Ã¢â‚¬â€ it remains a surprise to me now Ã¢â‚¬â€ that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, itâ€™s not for lack of trying. Weâ€™ve been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but theyâ€™re simply not there.
Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force May 30, 2003

The talking heads still don't get it. In large part, America has figured it out. For the last quarter of a century, WE the Republic, have been denied the choice to say NO to socialism.
It has been a setup. The fix was always in. We, the Republic, have been loosing a war of financial attrition for decades. We, the Republic are engaged in a war with those who govern us. Drastic measures are required to defeat this enemy in order to stop the bleeding that each of us are seeing in the depreciation of our savings, the constant onslaught of taxes, fees, and licenses. Each of them designed to remove our ability to live free.
If a slave is a person who works for no money, then a paid person who works with no money left for savings or investment is therefore a slave.
The Communists are very good at planning each move, they have been at it for over sixty years, to bury us. They are so close to succeeding.
Trump has stepped in and has sensed our rage.We want to throw our shoes into the machinery. We want to turn over the apple carts and toss tea into the harbor. Trump is giving us a voice. He is giving our children and grandchildren a fighting chance of enjoying the life that our parents fought and spilled blood in Europe and Japan so as to impart liberty to ourselves.
No, we will no longer hide in the shadow of political correctness.
No, we will no longer stand idle in the face of the globalist Red Menace.
No, we will not play the game of choosing which Socialist will rob our children.
No, we will not play the game of choosing which Socialist will import an army of decapitating, lawless, savages into our home to eradicate Freedom and the American Way.
ANY and EVERY politician who will not build a wall is declaring he/she DOES NOT CARE IF YOU DIE!
I do not think Trump is a conservative.
I do not think Trump is morally pious and pure.
I do not think Trump is void of indiscretions or mistakes.
I do believe that any candidate that is a true conservative, morally pure, pious, and has walked the straight and narrow...would not stand a chance against the the globalist red menace that is systematically deconstructing our nation.
No, far from it.
Right now we need our own paladin of chaotic malice with a depraved sense of overly vengeful justice that will stand not for giving quarter. Right now we need our own Son of a Bitch glorious bastard, faults and all. We need to stomp out the treachery of political correctness that perpetuates racial discontent and has created Europe-istan, a Nuclear Iran, as well as ushering in a new world order of penniless servitude consisting of the entire earthly population bowing to but a few of the elite socialist megalomaniacs.
We need our own monster.
Ted Cruz may well be as advertised. No one knows. Four years ago, no one knew who he was.
He is young, deploy the Trump Bomb now, it is an ugly weapon of mass destruction that will result in some collateral damage, but it is required.
Alas, we have run out of time.

It will take many Ted Cruz clones to restore order in the aftermath.

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.