posted
I have returned from an exciting trip to Walla Walla, Washington.
quote:Getting to the bottom of this issue matters, finally, for the centrepiece of Mr Bush's foreign policy - the doctrine of pre-emption. This doctrine rests on knowing the intentions and capabilities of those the US might pre-empt. But if it turns out that the intelligence on Iraq was flawed - or, worse, deliberately exaggerated - America's ability to pre-empt future, and perhaps graver, threats will be harmed. Given the political storm that has buffeted Tony Blair, a future British prime minister will think twice about joining the US in another pre-emptive strike. And once serious doubts about the credibility of what America's leaders say about new threats are raised, the American public may not want to go along either.
We must get to the bottom of why US intelligence was so far off the mark on Iraq's WMD stocks. Congress may hold hearings but its work will inevitably be compromised by partisan squabbling. The president would do himself and the country a favour if he pre-empted Congress by appointing an independent commission of people with unquestioned integrity to review the intelligence. Modelled perhaps on the Tower commission that President Ronald Reagan appointed after the Iran-Contra scandal, the commission would determine what we knew and when we knew it. And it would recommend how to gather, analyse and disseminate intelligence in ways that reassure rather than mislead.
What happened to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction - whether they were hidden, given to others, or destroyed - is too important a question to be left to the vagaries of partisan politics. It must be answered soon, by those with the credibility to resolve the matter once and for all.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Veers: No, it is not complex. We cannot destroy vast quantities of deadly chemical and biological weapons, and then have no trace of them ever being there. It's not feasible. Surely, by now, we would've found some trace of these weapons if we had bombed them.
Who says we bombed them? Aside from the people who urged Clinton to bomb them in 1998...
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I was responding to Omega's comment: "that leaves that we somehow accidentally destroyed those materials leaving absolutely no trace,"
I doubt very much they were in some can that someone accidentally threw away, or that we ran over some chemicals with a tank...The only way we could've "accidentally destroyed" vast quantities of chem/bio weapons is if we bombed them into oblivion. But there would be traces of these deadly agents left if we did bomb them, unless, say, we used napalm or maybe 21,000 pound MOABs...
posted
Okay, so they either still exist in Iraq, they still exist outside Iraq, or they were destroyed by Sadaam who didn't prove their destruction just because he was... what, feeling suicidal? We KNOW those materials existed. Whether they still existed as of the time we started the war, I don't know, but he did have chemical materials that he never accounted for destroying.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Okay, so they either still exist in Iraq, they still exist outside Iraq, or they were destroyed by Sadaam who didn't prove their destruction just because he was... what, feeling suicidal? We KNOW those materials existed. Whether they still existed as of the time we started the war, I don't know, but he did have chemical materials that he never accounted for destroying.
-------------------- Like A Bat Out Of Hell...
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
That's impossible, Bush said they were there and he would never lie.
And the UN inspectors said they were there, up to 1998, when they left, and they would never lie.
You, on the other hand, keep repeating the same utter crap.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Of course, this is still the same Hans Blix who reported that Iraq had no nuclear program, back in the 1980's... when it did.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Quote from Cheney: "Iraq will have nuclear weapons fairly soon." Talk show, August 2002.
--"Fairly soon"--as in, say, ten years? Maybe five? In that case, the next "Star Wars" movie will be out "very, very soon!"
Quotes, from Bush: "We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." Radio Adress, October 2002.
--Huh? Where are these? Shouldn't they be there, ready to be launched?
"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons." "We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas." "We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States." October, 2002.
--Wow, thousands of tons...that's millions of pounds. Where are they? Where are those UAVs, capable of hitting targets in the US?
"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" - his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." Cincinnati, Ohio Speech. October, 2002.
--False! The CIA advised him not to mention the uranium thing, but...
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." State of the Union Address, January, 2003.
--"Had the materials"...Desert Fox, people, Desert Fox... Or, if not, then where are those materials?
posted
Yet again, if he had the materials and we blew them up, shouldn't we have found some evidence of that?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Veers: Here comes a bit o'research:
Quotes, from Bush: "We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." Radio Adress, October 2002/.
--Huh? Where are these? Shouldn't they be there, ready to be launched?.
Depends on whether they were dug up and deployed or not. It's rare that you can hide things from inspectors and deploy them at the same time, but you can authorize anything, anytime.
quote: "The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons." "We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas." "We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States." October, 2002.
--Wow, thousands of tons...that's millions of pounds. Where are they? Where are those UAVs, capable of hitting targets in the US?
Not "targets in the US," "targeting the US." There's a difference. The Embassy attacks in Africa, and the attacks in Riyadh and the attack on the USS Cole, targeted the US, even though no targets were IN the US. The weapons data comes straight from UNSCOM, and has never been disproven. We FOUND a UAV, if you recall.
quote: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" - his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." Cincinnati, Ohio Speech. October, 2002.
--False! The CIA advised him not to mention the uranium thing, but....
Only the tube thing has been declared (I have yet to see "proven") false. The rebuilding of facilities, and the existence of the "nuclear mujahediin, have not been disputed.
quote: "Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." State of the Union Address, January, 2003.
--"Had the materials"...Desert Fox, people, Desert Fox... Or, if not, then where are those materials?
There is no "if not." The 1991-1998 UN inspectors also made these estimations. You tell ME where they went. (Iraq was supposed to do that, but they didn't.) Was the UN LYING when they made those statements?
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, it was explicitly stated that the threat from Iraqi unmanned aerial vehicles was directed at the USA proper.
From the President's speech of February 6:
quote: Iraq has developed spray devices that could be used on unmanned aerial vehicles with ranges far beyond what is permitted by the Security Council. A UAV launched from a vessel off the American coast could reach hundreds of miles inland.
Bolding mine, of course. (How would one bold in a speech, anyway? By shouting, I guess, or maybe dropping half an octave and making like James Earl Jones.)
quote: We FOUND a UAV, if you recall.
The notoriously liberal Cato Institute does not seem to think so. I believe I recall the discovery you seem to be refering to, but a Google News search doesn't turn up any news stories about it, which is kind of odd. All one can find is claims that the Iraqis were testing such vehicles, but nothing to suggest their tests were even successful.
I should note that there are some references to the story on sites with names like "antiwar.org" and "liberalslant.com," but I'm not going to rely on them as the sole sources of information for reasons which should be obvious. The claim is that the supposed UAV you refer to, and that I can recall hearing about, was essentially a wooden mockup, not even necessarily flight worthy, and hardly a clear and present danger. Note that no cache of the large number of the things implied to exist has yet been discovered.
If anything, it seems the Iraqi program was real, but never got beyond the prototype stage. This in itself is hardly grounds for judging the war one way or another, since one could just as easily claim that stopping such a program was justified as someone else could claim it wasn't.
Still, there's more than enough misinformation out there without us adding to it, isn't there?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Seems to me, at the very least, that Bush picked bits of intelligence that would best suit his needs, regardless of if it were sketchy or not. Much like Blair is being accused of back in Britian. I would write more, but I'm too tired at the moment...damn 90 degree weather...
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic