Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: bray

Thanks Bray. It is possible that the WMD were moved to Syria but according to my reading of the documents, my analysis, and knowing the paranoid nature of Saddam, I doubt that this happened.


30 posted on 04/23/2007 12:30:47 PM PDT by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: jveritas

So really what your saying in a verbage sense is that if GW was to talk about these precursers PravdABDNC would claim they were Fertilizer or Pesticides. He would be in a no win situation, even though he knows they were about to become WMD.

Pray for W and Our Troops


35 posted on 04/23/2007 12:35:52 PM PDT by bray (The Surge is Working against both Enemies of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

To: jveritas; bray; april15Bendovr

It’s possible that both things happened.

Some materials as well gold and currency (1 heavy truck with about $1 billion in gold and currency was intercepted early in the Iraqi Freedom on the way to Syria) may have been smuggled to Syria - possibly by Russian Spetsnaz, before moving most of it back to Russia - Syria is not the most reliable of safekeepers - some of it may have been stolen there or left as payment for “right of way” service as I remember that Jordan stopped a plot of chemical attack by some Syrians a couple of years ago - may have been from the same stock.

Some may have been moved to the region where Saddam thought he could get access to it later, since he was planning on continuing the “war”.

Some chemicals that can’t be easily deployed, presented a program disclosure problem and may have been dumped to Tigris and Euphrates - I remember some reports of heavy concentrations of cyanide and other WMD or “dual-use” (aren’t they all?) chemicals found there.

Bush has long stopped trying to justify WMD part (as it’s only being mocked and would be a distraction for him now) and moved on to the things he needs to do in WOT. Also, silence may serve several purposes :

1. Do not disclose that there are WMDs in the area, lest cause an incidental “treasure” hunt.

2. Those who were sitting on the fence here at home about WMDs (like Hillary) may feel safer to criticize it now and would be more open to being proven wrong later, possibly near election... BTW she was pretty cagey and shrewd about that and limited herself to the “conduct” of the war.

3. Possibly getting information and/or cooperation from interested sources on more important matters or not disclosing methods and operations for now demands silence.

4. Anything that isn’t provable, i.e. in your hands, with embedded reporters right there and then, would be dismissed by Dems and al-media, so why bother for now?


159 posted on 04/23/2007 9:39:47 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

To: jveritas

Hi Joseph -

I believe that some WMDs were moved to Syria during the time that Blair and President Bush spent all that time and months preparing to go speak to the UN.

I can’t recall where I read an article in those preceding months before the war - (I believe it was) something about our troops seeing some movements of large trucks moving somethings toward the Syryian border by Saddams’s army in late summer or early fall -

Before - we actually went to war in the spring.

Do you recall reading anything like that either in the news or in your translations?


160 posted on 04/23/2007 10:31:35 PM PDT by Anita1 ((In support of the troops, but opposed to the war means - you don't believe in what they are doing!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson