IRAQ: Weapons of Mass Disappearance - (Where are the WMD? Manipulation to go to War? )

time ^ | Sunday, Jun. 01, 2003 | MICHAEL DUFFY

[jwalsh07]

The impression I got from your statement was that unless the units of quantity you are quoting from somewhere did not come forward the effort was ill conceived.

If that was wrong I apologise.

[TLBSHOW]

Last October, when I spoke at the Labour conference in Blackpool, I supported the efforts of President Bush and Prime Minister Blair to renew efforts to eliminate Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction,

Bill Clinton

http://www.labour.org.uk/clintoniraq180303/

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Painstaking analysis has failed to find any trace of outlawed germ warfare agents in two truck-mounted biological processing plants that U.S. forces discovered in Iraq...

But what was the INTENT of these Mobile facilities?

[templar]

Bush got the quantities right from the UN report of the weapons inspectors as they left Iraq in 1998.

So, maybe the UN was the origin of the lies? I doubt the the UN would ever lie for any reason. < /sarcasm >

there is something going on here that isn't being told. Someone's being had by someone, and I am beginning to suspect it's the U.S. (including Bush) that's the one being had. Question I am beginning to have is: Who's doing it, and why?

Maybe it's time to quit claiming Iraq had lots of nasty stuff and look around to see why we were led into war and exactly who led us there? I don't like being played for the sucker, and I doubt that you do either. Maybe we, the US as a whole, Bush, all of us, have just been snookered for some as yet unknown parties benefit.

[1rudeboy]

Keep in mind, that the good ol' USA gave Saddam WMD back in the 1980's for use against Iran. America has not only proliferated WMD around the world but we have lied about nations when we demanded them back.

Yeah, yeah. And we exterminated the Indians, enslaved the blacks, oppressed women, and disenfranchised other minorities, including the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendered. All in order to support the military-industrial complex. Say, are we a police state yet? If so, what are you still doing here?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I take the entire article and throw it in the garbage where it belongs.

But the great majority of people in this great land DO NOT!

Well they don't even read it, they just watch the big TV News shows and form their opinions from what they see!

[Buckeroo]

Go out on the corner and wave your ittsy-bittsy little American flag. Tell the world that the American government is the best thing since GOD. Tell the world that GWBush believes in democracy.......

[Peach]

During the Cold War, United States export policy focused primarily on restricting the export of sensitive "dual use" materials and technologies to the Soviet Union and its allies. This myopic approach to the non-proliferation of these materials ultimately resulted in the acquisition of unconventional weapons and missile-system technologies by several "pariah nations" with aggressive military agendas. For the United States, the reality of the dangers associated with these types of policies were realized during the Persian Gulf War. Recognizing the shortcomings of existing policies, and with the dissolution of the Soviet empire, an inquiry was initiated by the Committee into the contributions that exports from the United States played in the weapons of mass destruction programs that have flourished under the direction of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein

There were dual use chemicals shared between nations, until we realized some nations were making evil uses of these chemicals. Nowhere in this article does it state we gave WMD to Saddam Hussein to use against Iran.

I've waited around for you to prove your case and you've failed twice.

[jwalsh07]

Snookered????????

Abu Nidal, dead.

Abu Abbas, the murderer of you fellow countrymen Leon Klinghoofer, in custody.

PLF, many dead.

Answar al Islam, many more deader.

Baathist Party, dead.

Al Qaeda in Northern Iraq, dead.

Scud Missiles pointing at our ally Israel, zero.

What makes for a good day in never never land?

[Consort]

Keep in mind, that the good ol' USA gave Saddam WMD back in the 1980's for use against Iran.

Yep. That's how we know he had them. We helped him, but he didn't appreciate it. So we took him out. That's the way it is. I think we also gave weapons to the Afghans to fight the Soviets, but they let the Taliban take over, so we took them out, too. That's the way it is. What's your problem?

[Peach]

I should correct myself. We DID NOT knowingly supply Iraq with WMD in order for them to defeat Iran. Iraq probably did take dual use chemicals and turn them into something evil.

Did you know that asparteme (artificial sweetener) used to be used by the Russians as a nerve agent, and yet look, it's being used by us as a sweetener.

Anyway, you still haven't back up your claims and I simply can't wait around any longer. It's been fun.

[templar]

So, you're telling us that all these reports over all those decades from non-related people/sources/organizations are all in on some gigantic lie? Oooh, it's a conspiracy!!! Danger, Will Robins, danger! Woosh, woosh, it's the black choppers!

I just want to see the weapons we were told were there by all of these people. That's all I ask. I think it's a reasonable request. Where are they?

Oh, I forgot, the "black choppers" must have spirited them off to somewhere else and our intelligence and satellites and observation craft weren't able to detect this because Saddam also perfected the secret of invisiblility. Probably from one of those crashed UFO's he got hold of back in GWI. Get real. It's looking more and more like he didn't make or have any after the ones we destroyed after GWI were gone.

Just show 'em to me. That's all I'm asking in return for supporting the war. Just show 'em to me. As they say, "Put up or shut up".

Again: Just show 'em to me.

[fooman]

they are beer trucks

[McGavin999]

I seriously doubt that. That's like saying we were snookered into going after terrorists because someone made up 9-11. Gee, according to your way of thinking, perhaps it was all a Hollywood special effects bonanza and the WTC actually still exists.

[templar]

What makes for a good day in never never land?

An interesting question. Who comes out ahead by all of this? I doubt it's any of the obvious public entities or their allies you mention.

[1rudeboy]

I can't go out on the corner. I'm still waiting for you to prove that we sold Iraq WMD's. LOL

[Buckeroo]

Failed? I have failed twice? I could easily take up Jim's HDDs to prove my point of view; it is obvious you either can not read or you can not accept the fact that America is involved in ALL this chaos around the world because of government intrusion cloaked in "National Security."

Harry Truman did a bad thing when he signed the NSA back in 1947 .... he basically gave the CIA the means to screw all Americans and the world.

[AntiGuv]

No, though I am quite obviously ambivalent regarding both the 'public relations' aspect of the war and the intelligence efforts that preceded it. I think that a very strong case can be made - one that will be accepted by the American public - that Saddam was a key national security threat, regardless. Most of the type of programs under question here could have been swiftly undertaken by Iraq if & when sanctions were removed. That was the real case for war (along with the liberation case, that for some reason other nations/parties didn't see fit to apply to Iraq though they had no problem applying to, say, Bosnia & Kosovo..)

The problem that this administration has, as I see things, is that they have not properly made the case for their doctrine of preemption. They also have not properly made the case for the great benefits which could extend from a sweeping restructure of Mideast affairs. Most of arises because of recalcitrant foreign nations which refuse to accept these rationales, and an oftentimes conflicting debate on principles between different parts of the administration.

I do think that at some point the message needs to shift more completely from the prewar thesis as I've described to an explanation of apparent absence of those circumstances. I think that the longer the administration persists in maintaining that the prewar thesis will somehow get proven, the more of a potential problem they could face in making that case. Perhaps not, because to great extent they are already shifting to a more accurate explanation of why the war was necessary. If this is not handled successfully, I'm very concerned that this could derail future efforts to deal with North Korea, Syria, and Iran, by example.

Mostly I'm just a contrarian who likes to keep a debate going & push the tough issues, though.. ;) The fact of the matter is that these questions are going to get louder in the coming weeks & months - unless there's an altogether surprising (at this point) development - so I'd just as soon get it out of my system now. As I've said, I don't mind if I'm ultimately proven incorrect in my assessments.

[fooman]

the're dead, Jim!

[TLBSHOW]

Bush Plays Down Banned Weapons Hunt in Iraq

"We've discovered a weapons system -- biological labs that Iraq denied she had and labs that were prohibited under the U.N. resolutions," President Bush told reporters after talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

SNIP

Bush was noncommittal about Russia's future role in the Iraqi oil sector.

"Russia has had a long history of involvement in Iraq, and the Iraqi authorities, when they are firmly in place, will make the decision based upon that experience and based upon their country's best interests," Bush said.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters20030601_283.html