Replies

It doesn't make sense....if Saddam had no WMD, why wouldn't he just prove that to the inspectors rather than risk everything? Why the extended game of cat and mouse if there was nothing to hide? I don't get it.....

You know what, I agree.

But after trying to figure out what may have or may not have happened, I started reading some very rabid Bush supporters comments on the lack of finding WMD's. Then I extrapolated it to Saddam.

Many Bush supports have theorized that the administration is holding back the finding of the WMD's in the event a dem starts using the lack of a find as a talking point. When the talking point starts making impact, wham, it's trotted out that we have found them and kept the info classified. Dem is then shattered.

Now to Saddam. I believe no matter what, we were going to invade Iraq. Whether or not there were WMD's, whether or not there were proven ties to Al Queda, whether or not there was still extensive atrocities against Iraqi citizens, whether nor not Saddam was in compliance with the disarmament he signed after '91......we were going in. Period. Saddam knew that. All this has been brewing for the better part of a year and almost two. It has been telecast. The UN show was simply that, a show.

In the mind of a Saddam, what better way to show that Bush was reckless than to have nothing on hand and not say anything about it. Powell at the UN showing his display boards while Saddam and his "men" set around the TV with CNN on watching and thinking "Think of what world opinion is going to be when they find nothing in the way of WMD's". Again, Saddam knew Bush was going in no matter what.

For now, the US is not worried about public opinion of the world. We won, we conquered, we were victorious. It will only begin to hurt IF our occupation lasts forever and casualties continue to mount. With regard to culture, Iraq is not us. They will not want our "freedoms" and will likely vote in several tribal Islamic leaders once we have turned the country back over to them. (If we stay there, then it gives Islam another reason to hate us so in either case, we likely lose). Add to that if the economy stays in the pits, people will do as they did President Bush I and turn on him. The above two things will then make the lack of WMD's an issue with the American people. Saddam may no longer be around or if he is will no longer be in a position to take power again, but if this theory is even 20 or 30% accurate, he again may have the last laugh on a Bush.

Look, I believe Saddam should have been removed from power. I also believe we were at best mislead and at worst lied to about the WMD's.

But again, just a possible scenario as to why Iraq let us go in when nothing appears to exist.

The inspectors were in Iraq for years and finally convinced there were no WMD's to be found. That was right before some defectors led them to massive catches that the inspectors would never have found on their own. The size was documented by the inspectors and they had only begun to destroy them when they left in 1998. Do you suppose Saddam finished the destruction of the existing WMD's? If so, then there should be evidence of that destruction. That stuff doesn't just disappear on it's own. There would be traces in the ground or the water etc.

All you have to do is read some of the first hand reports of what the massacre at Halabja was like to get an idea of what would happen if this stuff was let loose on an American city. We'll find the stuff, or find where it was destroyed.

Yes, we were goin in anyway. We were aware of what the Iraqi people were living through. We knew about Halabja, we knew about the destruction of the Marsh Arabs and the total destruction of a way of life that had been around since the beginning of civilization. We knew about the torture, about the electric cables, about the dismembering, about the mass graves. You bet we were going in anyway.