US Weapons Inspectors: "No WMD in Iraq"

[PeachMonkey]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3718150.stm

Despite the fact that the war on Iraq was sold to the American people (and the world) as necessary to deal with an immediate, urgent threat, it is now clear that Iraq had *no* stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

The spin from the Bush Administration and the unelected Iraqi puppet administration, continues, however.

"We had to take a hard look at every place where terrorists might get those weapons," [Bush] said. "One regime stood out. The dictatorship of Saddam Hussein." (One might ask how terrorists would get those weapons from a dictatorship that had none -- PM)

"We know Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. He used them," [Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister] Dr Saleh said, adding that in his view Saddam Hussein was himself a weapon of mass destruction. (Of course, the weapons were used when the US was still exporting components to manufacture them to Iraq. And the comment about Saddam himself being a weapon of mass destruction is beneath contempt -- PM)

 

[Cryozombie]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3718150.stm


"We had to take a hard look at every place where terrorists might get those weapons," [Bush] said. "One regime stood out. The dictatorship of Saddam Hussein." (One might ask how terrorists would get those weapons from a dictatorship that had none -- PM)

Well... at least we know for sure now

"We know Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. He used them," [Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister] Dr Saleh said, adding that in his view Saddam Hussein was himself a weapon of mass destruction. (Of course, the weapons were used when the US was still exporting components to manufacture them to Iraq.

Just so I am clear tho, that was occuring prior to the current Bush administration... such as Under Bush Sr and Clinton am I correct?

And the comment about Saddam himself being a weapon of mass destruction is beneath contempt -- PM)[/i]

Yeah... Takes a moron to think that up, and a bigger one to believe it.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Just so I am clear tho, that was occuring prior to the current Bush administration... such as Under Bush Sr and Clinton am I correct?

Actually, the gassing of Kurdish villages took place in 1987 and 1988 under the Reagan administration.

Both before and after this use of chemical weapons, the United States continued to sell Iraq the components needed to produce them.

 

[Xequat]

Well... at least we know for sure now.

Exactly. Plus the ties to Al-Qaeda AFTER 9/11 gave us plenty of reason to worry and investigate, any way (unless you're France, who hates us anyway). Yes, I know there were no ties between 9/11 and Iraq, even though the liberals would have you believe that that was an argument for going in. It wasn't, but there were ties after 9/11. Another distortion.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Yes, I know there were no ties between 9/11 and Iraq, even though the liberals would have you believe that that was an argument for going in. It wasn't, but there were ties after 9/11. Another distortion.

Wow... this spin is amazing.

*Conservatives* have posited connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda as a reason to invade after the fact, since the WMDs are nowhere to be found, in a desperate attempt to shore up the justification for the war.

Liberals have pointed out how not only were there no ties between Iraq and 9/11, but that the Al Qaeda links were not the given reason for the invasion.

 

[michaeledward]

Exactly. Plus the ties to Al-Qaeda AFTER 9/11 gave us plenty of reason to worry and investigate, ..... but there were ties after 9/11. Another distortion.

Please elaborate. Take a deep breath and please, slowly and clearly explain to me, what those ties between al Qaeda and Iraq consisted of. The simpler you can spell it out for me the better; maybe use bullet points. And, if you have references, can you cite them.

I realize that Michelle Malken is an expert on this stuff, but I am hoping for references that can match the weight and confidence of a group like, oh, say, the International Atomic Energy Adminstration, or the National Commission on the Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, you know ... someone big, like that as a source would be good.

 

[lvwhitebir]

Please elaborate. Take a deep breath and please, slowly and clearly explain to me, what those ties between al Qaeda and Iraq consisted of. The simpler you can spell it out for me the better; maybe use bullet points. And, if you have references, can you cite them.

From the Butler Report:

p119 Explains that there was evidence of an association between the Iraqi regime and Al Qaida since 1998. "Those reports described Al Qaida seeking toxic chemicals as well as other conventional terrorist equipment." It also states, "there is no evidence that these contacts led to practical co-operation."

p120 "Although Saddam's attitude to Al Qaida has not always been consistent, he has generally rejected suggestions of cooperation. Intelligence nonetheless indicates that ... meetings have taken place between senior Iraqi representatives and senior Al Qaida operatives... Al Qaida has shown interest in gaining chemical and biological (CB) expertise from Iraq, but we do not know whether any such training was provided."

"We conclude that the JIC made clear that, although there were contacts between the Iraqi regime and Al Qaida, there was no evidence of cooperation. It did warn of the possibility of terrorist attacks on coalition forces in Baghdad."

So we had good intelligence that meetings between Al Qaida and Iraq were taking place and what Al Qaida was asking for, but we don't know whether anything was provided or if there was cooperation in any form.

WhiteBirch

 

[heretic888]

So we had good intelligence that meetings between Al Qaida and Iraq were taking place and what Al Qaida was asking for, but we don't know whether anything was provided or if there was cooperation in any form.

Oy. Just think of how many "terrorist ties" that the United States would be guilty of if that was one's sole basis of "evidence"....

 

[michaeledward]

From the Butler Report:

p119 Explains that there was evidence of an association between the Iraqi regime and Al Qaida since 1998. "Those reports described Al Qaida seeking toxic chemicals as well as other conventional terrorist equipment." It also states, "there is no evidence that these contacts led to practical co-operation."

p120 "Although Saddam's attitude to Al Qaida has not always been consistent, he has generally rejected suggestions of cooperation. Intelligence nonetheless indicates that ... meetings have taken place between senior Iraqi representatives and senior Al Qaida operatives... Al Qaida has shown interest in gaining chemical and biological (CB) expertise from Iraq, but we do not know whether any such training was provided."

"We conclude that the JIC made clear that, although there were contacts between the Iraqi regime and Al Qaida, there was no evidence of cooperation. It did warn of the possibility of terrorist attacks on coalition forces in Baghdad."

So we had good intelligence that meetings between Al Qaida and Iraq were taking place and what Al Qaida was asking for, but we don't know whether anything was provided or if there was cooperation in any form.

WhiteBirch

Let's go one step further, if you will indulge me.

Please define ... 'ties' ... as in the sentence 'the ties to Al-Qaeda AFTER 9/11'
Also, please define ... 'practical co-operation' .... as in the sentence 'there is no evidence that these contacts led to ...'

And, let me ask you if you will agree that we now know that Iraq had no Chemical Weapons, no Biological Weapons, and no Nuclear Weapons at the time these meetings were to said to have taken place?

 

[heretic888]

And, let me ask you if you will agree that we now know that Iraq had no Chemical Weapons, no Biological Weapons, and no Nuclear Weapons at the time these meetings were to said to have taken place?

Sure, but you only if you agree that Iraq was pursuing several "Weapons of Mass Destruction related programs". Heh.

*chuckle*

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Exactly. Plus the ties to Al-Qaeda AFTER 9/11 gave us plenty of reason to worry and investigate, any way (unless you're France, who hates us anyway). Yes, I know there were no ties between 9/11 and Iraq, even though the liberals would have you believe that that was an argument for going in. It wasn't, but there were ties after 9/11. Another distortion.

*sigh* I am so tired of the France-bashing. Do I think they are biased? Sure. They also, directly after the September 11 attacks, grieved with our country, pledging support against terrorism (although, yes, not Iraq) and said "We are all Americans". When have we done something like that for another country?

I clearly remember how 9/11 was repeatedly tied to Iraq in speeches before we invaded - for example, from our own President. That was the *main* argument - that Iraq was behind/supported the attacks, and Osama bin Laden.

 

[Cryozombie]

Stupid question, but this just occured to me...

If, as everyone seems to be saying we have been supplying saddam with the materials to make WMD, isnt that in and of itself enough reason to believe he had them?

I mean... If I gave my neighbor a shotgun, I would assume he had a shotgun hidden away somewhere, even if the guy across the street from us said he looked around my neighbors house and didnt find a shotgun...

Hmmm.

 

[Phoenix44]

I mean... If I gave my neighbor a shotgun, I would assume he had a shotgun hidden away somewhere, even if the guy across the street from us said he looked around my neighbors house and didnt find a shotgun...

Not if the police told you that they took away the shotgun in 1994, AND that they checked the house today, and didn't find any shotgun.

So, under the circumstances, do you firebomb your neighbors house?

 

[Flatlander]

So, under the circumstances, do you firebomb your neighbors house?

Now that is a beautiful extension of the analogy.

 

[Cryozombie]

So, under the circumstances, do you firebomb your neighbors house?

If I dont like him, and I know FOR A FACT he has no shotgun to shoot me with, I probably would, actually.

But, that's why I am for allowing an armed populace... a topic for a different thread.

 

[michaeledward]

Stupid question, but this just occured to me...

If, as everyone seems to be saying we have been supplying saddam with the materials to make WMD, isnt that in and of itself enough reason to believe he had them?

I mean... If I gave my neighbor a shotgun, I would assume he had a shotgun hidden away somewhere, even if the guy across the street from us said he looked around my neighbors house and didnt find a shotgun...

Hmmm.

Truthfully, I think that not everyone was saying that we had been supplying Saddam with the materials to make the Weapons of Mass Destruction. I know I have seen that claim thrown about, but in my research, I haven't been able to find any definite links.

I do know that we provided Iraq with intelligence about the Iranian formations so that when they used the Weapons of Mass Destruction on the battlefield, they were more effective. I also am pretty sure that we knew that France (oh, geez, there it is) was invovled in providing Iraq with materials and know how. I will gladly allow myself to be corrected if someone can show some definitive, credible links.

Of course, that was all going on back in the 80's, when we were allies with Hussein (or at least quiet supporters against them nasty Iranians, who, after all held a couple of hundred hostages in 79 & 80).

In the time between when Hussein had and used the weapons, and March 19, 2003 ... there was a full scale 100 hour war, and 12 years of low level, constant hostility, and a dis-armement contingent looking through everything closet they could find for the weapons.

The truth is, they weren't there. Listening to Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham today, I just have to laugh. How many people have to say there weren't any weapons and Hussein wasn't a threat before these people will just shut up. Scott Ritter, David Kay, Muhammed El Baradia, Charles Duelfur, Colin Powell. Oh, well.

 

[Kane]

The final report of the US Weapons Inspectors did state that Saddam did have the raw materials to make WMD. The chief inspector said that Saddam was going to resume making WMD in the very near future. Though that wasn't my main reason for the Iraq war, it is one thing to consider. In any case even the weapons inspector said, "THE WORLD IS A BETTER PLACE WITHOUT SADDAM."

 

[michaeledward]

The truth is, they weren't there. Listening to Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham today, I just have to laugh. How many people have to say there weren't any weapons and Hussein wasn't a threat before these people will just shut up. Scott Ritter, David Kay, Muhammed El Baradia, Charles Duelfur, Colin Powell. Oh, well.

The final report of the US Weapons Inspectors did state that Saddam did have the raw materials to make WMD. The chief inspector said that Saddam was going to resume making WMD in the very near future. Though that wasn't my main reason for the Iraq war, it is one thing to consider. In any case even the weapons inspector said, "THE WORLD IS A BETTER PLACE WITHOUT SADDAM."

Look at Kane, see him contort himself to try and keep from going insane in the face of new facts. Watch his unwillingness to acknowledge and process new information.

Kane, please go and explain to the family of Staff Sgt. Richard L. Morgan Jr. of St. Clairsville, Ohio that the world is better a better place with Saddam Hussein. Staff Sgt. Morgan was killed in Iraq on October 5, 2004; approximately 10 months after Hussein was captured.

Or Christopher S. Potts - Killed 10/3
Or Russell L. Collier - Killed 10/3
Or James L. Pettaway Jr. - Killed 10/3
Or Jack Taft Hennessy - Killed 10/1
Of Michael A. Uvanni - Killed 10/1

I am going to make a wild guess here, and suggest to you that the mothers and fathers of these people, their sons and daughters, there wives, brothers and sisters really don't give a damn about the World being a better place without Saddam.

Just a guess there - Mike

 

[Tkang_TKD]

Truthfully, I think that not everyone was saying that we had been supplying Saddam with the materials to make the Weapons of Mass Destruction. I know I have seen that claim thrown about, but in my research, I haven't been able to find any definite links.

I found a few that might be worth looking at:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-30-iraq-ushelp_x.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29&notFound=true

 

[michaeledward]

Thank you. Most enlightening.