posted on June 9, 2003 02:07:26 PM newLinda, The fact that administrations prior to this one believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction cannot be cited as justification for lies about it today.
Helen, it wasn't ONLY the past THREE administrations that believed this. Most of the world did too. Can you answer why you believe the UN would have sent inspectors in if the world leaders all were in agreement that Saddam had no WOMD? Why Saddam wouldn't have just cooperated with the inspectors to prove he didn't have them all this time since 1991? Maybe there's something I'm not getting.
Although, imo, if Saddam *himself* told you he had these weapons, I don't think you'd believe that either as then you'd have one less thing to blame on bush.
posted on June 9, 2003 02:20:19 PM new
I think that you are missing the point that the Bush administration was so specific about the weapons of mass destruction. And, at the same time that our country was being told about all of these weapons, ready to deploy in 45 minutes, we learn that the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency had determined that there were no weapons of mass destruction.
posted on June 9, 2003 02:39:25 PM new
Well....you get excited over hoping this latest mud slinging works. Me...I think it will all blow over in a couple of weeks or so.
posted on June 9, 2003 03:00:15 PM new
It hasn't blown over for Blair and I doubt that it will blow over here either.
Some, at the very least may classify this as an enormous intelligence blunder. Others will classify it as an unpardonable lie. Few will see it as "mudslinging".
CNN just reported a poll suggesting that 86% believe that it represents an "exaggeration".
posted on June 9, 2003 05:57:21 PM new
Another tale!
Captives Deny Qaeda Worked With Baghdad.
James Risen
The Bush administration has not made these statements public, though it frequently highlighted intelligence reports that supported its assertions of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda as it made its case for war against Iraq.
James Risen, author of this report is Intelligence correspondent for the New York Times - Washington Bureau. He writes regularly on the intelligence community and how it is used in U.S. foreign policy. Most recently, he has covered the use of U.S. intelligence capabilities in the Afghanistan (2002) and Iraq (2003) wars. He was a member of the reporting team that won the Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for explanatory reporting for coverage of Sept. 11 and terrorism, and is coauthor of Wrath of Angels.
posted on June 9, 2003 07:49:11 PM new
An arguement can be made that the policies of the prior administration as well as UN sanctions successfully disarmed Iraq prior to this war. An absence of WMD's suggests this to be the case.
Either Bush lied repeatedly or information and analysis given him was faulty. If faulty our intelligence community must be revamped. In either case our government is being run by incompetants or liars, how you wish to view this is up to your interpretation.
posted on June 9, 2003 08:15:05 PM new
"Maybe there's something I'm not getting." -Linda
Do I detect a flash of introspective genius?
In '03 the UN sent inspectors into Iraq, trusting that their presence and their mission might restrain the self serving, sanguineous little pustule that now occupies the White House, and his slavering band of cutthroats.
Previously, in '91, UN inspectors were sent into Iraq to supervise and insure Iraqi compliance with UN Resolution 687. It appears they did a masterful job.
BAGHDAD -- U.S. military units assigned to track down Iraqi weapons of mass destruction have run out of places to look and are getting time off or being assigned to other duties, even as pressure mounts on President Bush to explain why no banned arms have been found.
After nearly three months of fruitless searches, weapons hunters say they are now waiting for a large team of Pentagon intelligence experts to take over the effort, relying more on leads from interviews and documents.
"It doesn't appear there are any more targets at this time," said Lt. Col. Keith Harrington, whose team has been cut by more than 30 percent. "We're hanging around with no missions in the foreseeable future."
posted on June 10, 2003 02:52:03 PM new
Now, they are backing off the search for weapons and calling it a search for a "program". Do they really believe that the American people are so easily duped?
posted on June 10, 2003 05:01:20 PM new
davebraun - An arguement can be made that the policies of the prior administration as well as UN sanctions successfully disarmed Iraq prior to this war. An absence of WMD's suggests this to be the case. Yes one might argue that, but if anyone took the time to do a google search, they'd find many reports like the one I 'googled' below, that were reported AFTER the Dec. 1998 bombing. And if anyone does a simple search on the UN online site you'll see they stated they didn't have the proof they wanted to give the ruling there was a 'successful disarmed Iraq'.
[b]Secret Iraqi Missile Plant Uncovered[b/]
NewsMax.com
Sunday, Aug. 27, 2000 A German intelligence agency has pinpointed the location of a super-secret Iraqi missile factory just 25 miles from Baghdad, proving that Saddam Hussein has not given up his attempts to build weapons of mass destruction despite his failure to secure missile parts, including navigational instruments, from Russia and North Korea.
According to Germany's Bild newspaper, the German BND foreign intelligence service discovered the plant where they say some 250 engineers are working to perfect a new missile capable of hitting targets as far away as central Europe.
The spy agency reports that the plant known as "Al Mamoun" consists of several well-hidden buildings far from any main roads. Some of the facilities are underground.
Bild reports that the spy service "has now provided proof of what Western intelligence services have long suspected" – that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is still developing non-conventional weapons.
The plant is currently producing a solid-fuel short-range missile which has a range of only 90-plus miles, but the significance of the discovery of the plant, according to the intelligence service, is that it shows that "the Iraqi will and personnel for developing missiles still exist."
According to Bild, the intelligence service believes that Iraqi technicians are now working to design and build missiles with a range of 1,800 miles which have both a chemical and biological capability.
With such a range the Iraqis could hit targets not only in Israel but also in central Europe, noted Bild, which quoted intelligence officials as saying there was "a very real danger that, rather sooner than later, Germany will also fall within range of these weapons."
posted on June 10, 2003 05:12:10 PM new
The report you are high lighting states "The plant is currently producing a solid-fuel short-range missile which has a range of only 90-plus miles, but the significance of the discovery of the plant, according to the intelligence service, is that it shows that "the Iraqi will and personnel for developing missiles still exist." " it then goes on to speculate that the belief within German Intelligence is there are other programs but offers no support for the allegation. History has shown the Iraqi's at the time the United States invaded their sovereign nation had no such capability.
posted on June 10, 2003 05:15:15 PM new
Most troubling is the fact that the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency found that there was no threat from Saddam at the same time that the Bush administration was revealing the long list of weapons. Are you suggesting that the DIA and the Pentagon should learn how to search for answers on Google?
BERLIN, Sept 14 (Reuters) - German intelligence denied a newspaper report on Saturday saying it discovered Iraq has adapted Soviet-era MiG-23 aircraft to fly unmanned and deliver biological and chemical weapons up to 1,000 km (620 miles) away.
Germany's Bild am Sonntag newspaper said in an advance copy of an article due out on Sunday that August Hanning, head of German intelligence, had informed members of parliament of the new discovery at a confidential briefing this week.
A spokesman for the BND intelligence agency confirmed that a meeting had taken place with members of parliament but later denied that the newspaper report reflected the BND's intelligence or that it had reported about adapted MiG-23s.
The newspaper had also reported that the BND had established that Iraq already possessed the theoretical know-how to build nuclear weapons, but was still lacking important components made out of a special kind of steel.
German intelligence also believed that the Iraqi government was currently focusing its efforts on developing biological weapons such as anthrax, the newspaper reported.
The BND spokesman did not make any comment on these elements of the newspaper article.
U.S. President George W. Bush told the U.N. General Assembly on Thursday that unspecified action against Iraq would be unavoidable if Baghdad does not meet U.N. demands to readmit weapons inspectors to Iraq.
The United States is seeking a new U.N. resolution which sets a deadline for Iraqi compliance and sets out the consequences for failure. The United States says ousting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is the best solution.
Chief U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix said in an interview due to appear in Germany's Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung on Sunday that there was still hope Baghdad would agree to readmit inspectors after the Bush speech.
"The first reactions from Iraq were negative. But we have in the past experienced that Iraq can quickly change its mind," he told the newspaper. "I believe a change of heart in Baghdad is still possible."
Blix said if there was a breakthrough and Baghdad agreed to readmit inspectors, a first group could be on the ground within two weeks although it would take a month for a full presence to be established in Iraq.
Blix reiterated that since inspectors left Iraq in 1998 satellite images showed there had been building work at former inspection sites which would have to be checked again, adding Iraq could also be in possession of anthrax again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Stories June 5, 2003 - 14:50 GMT UN expected to exempt US from suits by new court
June 5, 2003 - 14:47 GMT Mideast peace hopes tempered by Arafat, hardliners
June 5, 2003 - 14:29 GMT Britain unlikely to give Saddam's daughters asylum
June 5, 2003 - 14:27 GMT Jewish settlers stare down Sharon eviction notice
June 5, 2003 - 14:11 GMT Turkey not ready to join EU - European Parliament
posted on June 10, 2003 06:12:06 PM new
A question for the lefties:
Why did Bill Clinton launch a few hundred cruise missiles into Iraq a few years ago during Operation Desert Fox? Those cruise missiles cost about $1 million apiece.
posted on June 10, 2003 06:24:59 PM new
ebayauctionguy, Bill's book is due out in 2004. Be the first on your block to buy a copy and you'll be among the first to know. You can probably reserve a copy at amazon.com
posted on June 10, 2003 06:31:33 PM new CHRONOLOGY
From DESERT STORM to DESERT FOX
1991 -- Following the end of DESERT STORM in March, Shiite Muslims in southern Iraq rebel, but are defeated by Iraq's elite Republican Guard. This is followed by a Kurdish insurrection that is also defeated. The United States, Great Britain and France create a safe haven for the Kurds north of the 36th parallel and ban Iraqi planes from the area.
1992 -- In August, the United Nations establishes a no-fly zone along the 32nd parallel after Iraq launches renewed attacks against Shiite Muslims. The United States and its allies begin patrolling the no-fly zone, operations which continue today. In December, the U.S. planes intercept and shoot down an Iraqi MIG-25 that violates the no-fly zone.
1993 -- In January, the United States accuses Saddam Hussein of moving missiles into southern Iraq. Iraq refuses to remove the missiles. Allied planes and ships attack the missile sites and a nuclear facility near Baghdad. In June, following the discovery of a plot to assassinate former President George Bush, U.S. ships fire 24 cruise missiles at intelligence headquarters in Baghdad.
1994 -- Saddam Hussein moves Iraqi troops to the Kuwaiti border. The forces withdraw after the United States deploys a carrier group, warplanes and 54,000 troops to the Persian Gulf region.
1996 -- In August, Saddam Hussein sends forces into northern Iraq and captures city of Irbil, a key city inside the Kurdish haven established above the 36th parallel in 1991. The following month, U.S. ships and airplanes attack military targets in Iraq to punish the Iraqi military and President Clinton extends the southern no-fly zone to just south of Baghdad.
1997 -- In October, a protracted confrontation with Saddam Hussein begins after Iraq accuses U.S. members of the U.N. inspection teams of being spies and expels the majority of U.S. participants. The U.N. Security Council threatens renewed economic sanctions. The confrontation continues into November as Iraq expels the remaining six U.S. inspectors and the United Nations withdraws other inspectors in protest. Inspectors are readmitted after the United States and Great Britain again begin a military build-up in the Gulf. However, later in November, Iraq announces it will not allow inspectors access to sites designated as "palaces and official residences." U.N. officials protest, having long suspected that such sites were being used to conceal possible weapons of mass destruction.
1998 -- The tensions that began in October 1997 continue. In February, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan works out an agreement with Iraq that resumes weapons inspections. In turn, Iraq receives promises the United Nations will consider removing its economic sanctions. Inspections continue into August, when Iraq cuts ties with weapons inspectors, claiming it has seen no U.N. move toward lifting sanctions.
The Final Days
October 31 -- Iraq cuts off all work by U.N. monitors. The United States and Great Britain warn of possible military strikes to force compliance. A renewed military build-up in the Persian Gulf begins.
November 5 -- The U.N. Security Council condemns Iraq for violating agreements signed after the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
November 11 -- The United Nations withdraws most of its staff from Iraq.
November 14 -- With B-52 bombers in the air and within about 20 minutes of attack, Saddam Hussein agrees to allow U.N. monitors back in. The bombers are recalled before an attack occurs. Weapons inspectors return to Iraq a few days later.
December 8 -- Chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler reports that Iraq is still impeding inspections. U.N. teams begin departing Iraq.
December 15 -- A formal U.N. report accuses Iraq of a repeated pattern of obstructing weapons inspections by not allowing access to records and inspections sites, and by moving equipment records and equipment from one to site another.
December 16 -- The United States and Great Britain begin a massive air campaign against key military targets in Iraq.
"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said. The Iraqi dictator has used these weapons against his neighbors and his own people, he said, and "left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
LMAO!!
[ edited by ebayauctionguy on Jun 10, 2003 06:36 PM ]
Clinton said he and his national security advisers agreed that Hussein presented a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. He said he deemed military action necessary to prove the international community, led by the United States, had not lost its will. Failure to act, Clinton said, would have "fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region."
posted on June 10, 2003 07:45:13 PM new
"Those cruise missiles cost about $1 million apiece." -ebayauctionguy
What is the price tag on the lives of the two hundred or more "coalition" forces that have been killed while you were busy laughing?
"This is what extremely grieves us, that a man who never fought
Should contrive our fees to pilfer, on who for his native land
Never to this day had oar, or lance, or blister in his hand."
-Aristophanes, Wasps, 422 B.C.
How's the WTC investigation going?
It was well funded; OVER 2X as much as I saw a Wagner Base Ball Card fetch on ebay. (doh!)
[ edited by austbounty on Jun 11, 2003 06:45 AM ]
Baghdad has turned into Afghanistan faster than Afghanistan. As I write this, the UN weapons inspectors are going back in to see whether the looting of the city's main nuclear power station has given Baghdad a radioactive water supply. Could this really imaginably be, in the minds of those who went to war for even the best intentions, the preferred legacy? A land where all the children smell of petrol? A land fit only for flies?
posted on June 11, 2003 10:08:28 AM new
Its funny how the far right pushes common sense away to make excuses for George Bush.
Iraqs weapons were put to an end in the 90's.That is when the whole world agreed that Iraq had weapons. That was then and this is now.
That is why most of the world was against this war. Say goodbye to your hero. I have a feeling its going to get pretty ugly for him and his administration in the coming months.
The intellegiance is starting to leak. The right wing news media is starting to turn,Republicans are making acusations. General Tommy Franks is retiring,Ari Fliesher is quiting,the Bush adminstration has been changing thier stories and reasons.
In other words,Their fu@# and its only going to get worse.
posted on June 11, 2003 10:14:16 AM newaustbounty Priceless. I almost backed up before I took a closer look. We do not see things as they are. We see them as we are.
------------The Talmud
posted on June 11, 2003 10:15:23 AM new
One other thing. You guys really think this far right wing administartion cares about the Iraqi people? These are muslums...
The far right hates the gays and you really think they give a damn about muslums? Its not in a republicans character to like these types of people.
So please, I dont want to hear we went to war to save the Iraqi people.If we went to war to save them then we should be saving the starving people in Africa etc...
It doesnt take a war to help them.
So if the war isnt about WOMD, and the war isnt about saving the Iraqi people,then what was it about?
posted on June 11, 2003 10:16:56 AM newBill Clinton in 1998:
"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said. The Iraqi dictator has used these weapons against his neighbors and his own people, he said, and "left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
posted on June 11, 2003 10:43:26 AM new
lol you guys are so determined to defend this shmuck. I got news for ya. He doesnt care about you so why do you waist your time.
And if anyone does a simple search on the UN online site you'll see they stated they didn't have the proof they wanted to give the ruling there was a 'successful disarmed Iraq'.