The Great Satan has a theory that seems to me to make sense: Saddam used Al Qaeda to deliver anthrax as a threat, and the U.S. government refuses to admit publicly that it has been intimidated out of acting against Iraq.
In addition, leftists in the media and the FBI would have additional reason not to follow leads leading to the Islamists and Iraq: that way leads a full-blown war, in which Bush would enjoy the popularity of a wartime president, and the left would be blown away.
I'll buy into the first part of his theory; but, I beg do differ on the latter. Intimidate George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld? I don't think so. I'm thinking that we've had nearly a decade of systematic military depletion, we are currenty fighting in a war in Afghanistan, and we're sitting tight until we are prepared to engage and defeat Iraq.
In addition, leftists in the media and the FBI would have additional reason not to follow leads leading to the Islamists and Iraq: that way leads a full-blown war, in which Bush would enjoy the popularity of a wartime president, and the left would be blown away.
Let's play with that theory a little.
Whether the government received a direct threat or not, we weren't ready to take out Saddam at that time. Could we have laid the blame for the anthrax at the feet of any one country, there would have been an overwhelming outcry from the public to go to war immediately. There likely would have been an outcry to go nuclear. People were scared and still watching the clean up at the WTC.
Perhaps you've noticed that Scrowcroft, Baker, Eagleberger, Scott Ritter, and others are against going to war with Iraq. At the end of the first war, you'll remember we finally reached an agreement that Iraq would be permitted to pump "X" amount of oil with which to buy humanitarian supplies. While Ritter was not part of the administration at that time as such, being involved with the UN inspections, he would have had close contact with them. My guess is that if anyone knew how to do it, and wanted to take the time to look, they'd find that the above-mentioned group-at least most of them-now have some interests in Iraqi oil or it's production and don't want to rock the boat (or maybe want time to divest). But I digress...back to the anthrax...
Whether there was a form of blackmail or not, the currrent Bush would have been foolish to try to tackle Iraq right after 9/11. There was too much preparation to be done. So they closed down the AMI building, where proof of Iraq's involvement will somehow lie, rather than take the chance that news of Iraq's involvement would leak.
Whether he's as ready as he would like to be or not, I think Bush has decided to give the green light for the war. I heard Buchanan mention in an interview that Bush was losing support for attacking Iraq now that our "prominent" Republicans are urging him to abandon a war effort.
The FBI announced they are going to go through the AMI building again, more thoroughly this time, and that they expect this will take about 2 weeks.
Someone mentioned in a post the other day that there will be a new moon on the 6th, which is about 2 weeks away...
Does that mean we can expect a war in 2 weeks? Not necessarily. But I think that the FBI going back into that building signals that Bush is getting ready to provide proof to the public that his war with Saddam is necessary, even if it has to be done unilaterally.