Posted on 05/30/2003 1:11:24 PM PDT by fritter
Wolfowitz says Saudi troop withdrawal was 'huge' reason for war with Iraq
Associated Press
BRUSSELS, Belgium -- European critics of the Iraq war expressed shock Friday at published remarks by a senior U.S. official playing down Iraq's weapons of mass destruction as the reason for the conflict.
In an interview in the next issue of Vanity Fair magazine, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz cited "bureaucratic reasons" for focusing on Saddam Hussein's alleged arsenal and said a "huge" reason for the war was to enable Washington to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia.
"For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on," Wolfowitz was quoted as saying.
He said one reason for going to war against Iraq that was "almost unnoticed but huge" was the need to maintain American forces in Saudi Arabia as long as Saddam was in power.
Those troops were sent to Saudi Arabia to protect the desert kingdom against Saddam, whose forces invaded Kuwait in 1991, but their presence in the country that houses Islam's holiest sites enraged Islamic fundamentalists, including Osama bin Laden.
Within two weeks of the fall of Baghdad, the United States announced it was removing most of its 5,000 troops from Saudi Arabia and would set up its main regional command center in Qatar.
However, those goals were not spelled out publicly as the United States sought to build international support for the war. Instead, the Bush administration focused on Saddam's failure to dismantle chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.
The failure of U.S. forces to locate extensive weapons stocks has raised doubts in a skeptical Europe whether Iraq represented a global security threat.
Wolfowitz's comments followed a statement by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who suggested this week that Saddam might have destroyed his banned weapons before the war began.
On Friday, the commander of U.S. Marines in Iraq said he was surprised that extensive searches have failed to discover any of the chemical weapons that U.S. intelligence had indicated were supplied to front line Iraqi forces at the outset of the war.
"Believe me, it's not for lack of trying," Lt. Gen. James Conway told reporters. "We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there."
The remarks by Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld revived the controversy over the war as President Bush left for a European tour in which he hopes to put aside the bitterness over the war, which threatened the trans-Atlantic partnership.
In Denmark, whose government supported the war, opposition parties demanded to know whether Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen misled the public about the extent of Saddam's weapons threat.
"It was not what the Danish prime minister said when he advocated support for the war," Jeppe Kofod, the Social Democrats' foreign affairs spokesman, said in response to Wolfowitz's comments. "Those who went to war now have a big problem explaining it."
Former Danish Foreign Minister Niels Helveg Petersen said he was shocked by Wolfowitz's claim. "It leaves the world with one question: What should we believe?" he told The Associated Press.
In Germany, where the war was widely unpopular, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeiting newspaper said the comments about Iraqi weapons showed that America is losing the battle for credibility.
"The charge of deception is inescapable," the newspaper said Friday.
In London, former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, who quit as leader of the House of Commons to protest the war, said he doubted Iraq had any such weapons.
"The war was sold on the basis of what was described as a pre-emptive strike, 'Hit Saddam before he hits us,' " Cook told British Broadcasting Corp. "It is now quite clear that Saddam did not have anything with which to hit us in the first place."
During a visit to Poland, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Friday he has "absolutely no doubt" that concrete evidence will be found of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction.
"Have a little patience," Blair told reporters.
Wolfowitz was in Singapore, where he is due to speak Saturday at the Asia Security Conference of military chiefs and defense ministers from Asian and key Western powers.
He told reporters at the conference that the United States will reorganize its forces worldwide to confront the threat of terrorism.
"We are in the process of taking a fundamental look at our military posture worldwide, including in the United States," Wolfowitz said. "We're facing a very different threat than any one we've faced historically."
Vanity Fair misquoted him. What a surprise. /sarcasm off
Saddam was one evil SOB. I for one don't care if they ever find WMD's. The bottom line is we kicked a bad guys nutz in. And showed some more Arabs we mean business.
Where did he say that was "the major reason" for the war?
Seems to me, they destroyed your opinion and logic fairly quick. You just can't handle it..
By all means, leave. I'm certain many here believe your not worth the time.
ROTFLMAO! Yeah, sure, that'll happen.
What's it been, six weeks?
Was there some sort of statute of limitations on how long before these thing needed to be found after we kicked their ass?
Gee, if they were found too soon, they would have been planted by the CIA.
If they're found after today, they were planted by the CIA.
What was the optimum time? Not before four weeks but not after six weeks?
For sure. Wolfowitz has documentation that Vanity Fair screwed up. After recent events at the Times these "journalists" might want to make sure they get the facts straight. Very amusing.
Speaking of facts, GW469, there has not been enough time for any reasonable person to conclude there were no WMD's. Iraq is a big place. Keep this in mind too. "W" does not have to show his cards on this subject as soon as he is dealt them. The leftists might consider the past when dealing with "W". I don't think he would do one of his "rope-a-dopes" on the WMD issue but he might not be immediately forthcoming. Get it? Cuz just like a lot of others things he is ahead of the curve. I was watching "W" way before anyone was paying attention to him. He is very very smart.
Another logical answer is that we have found the stuff, and are compiling the full report and assembling the evidence before letting it out for the world to see.
No, the reason you appear to be a troll is that you signed up TODAY and the only posts you have made are
(1)posted an accusatory article about a Pentagon contract award, and
(2) your comments on this thread that read like talking points picked up from DNC operatives at DU (only even less substantive if that were possible).
Me too, simply shocked
We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him--George Bush
It wasn't a reason, it was the reason given by the President in the SOTU address.
If we could overturn the government of Iran NOW, before they test their first nuclear weapon (Gaffney is reporting that it may be as early as the end of THIS SUMMER!) we will have all the proof we need.
If you really are just a newbie who has questions about the war rather than a troll just here to cause disruption, then you will probably last for a while around here and maybe even get to enjoy your discussions with other FReepers. At least you appear to be attempting to engage in discussion. Usually, when someone shows up and posts anti-Pentagon articles and accusatory comments about the president the same day he signs up, the troll posts his(or her) inflammatory comments and then disappears. So, maybe you are just a misunderstood newbie. Time will tell.
That said, before making comments about Wolfowitz and Rummy being all over the board and before crying "Scandal!", it's a good idea to check out the sources, look for an agenda, and get your logic lined up. The military action to oust saddaam was way overdue, and a needed lesson and example to other regimes that may continue to aid and support the terrorists that seek to strike out at America.
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.