|
NEEWSS!!::Official: No WMD stockpiles in Iraq!!
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LiquidX |
Allrighty, soooo.. I dont think this is the day for all our fellow republican debaters.. the day has come. After some time, from claims coming out of Bush's mouth and other top officials within the administration, claiming there WAS weapons of mass destruction ( The main reason for the war ) .. Claiming that Saddam WAS building weapons or whatever sort of thing after the sanctions.. and so and so on.. is all, FALSE.. It's Official gals... as the Headlines put it "WASHINGTON (AP) -- Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 American lives, the top U.S. arms inspector reported Wednesday that he found no evidence that Iraq produced any weapons of mass destruction after 1991.'
| quote: | Official: No WMD stockpiles in Iraq
CIA: Saddam intended to make arms if sanctions ended
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 American lives, the top U.S. arms inspector reported Wednesday that he found no evidence that Iraq produced any weapons of mass destruction after 1991.
The report also says Saddam Hussein's weapons capability weakened during a dozen years of U.N. sanctions before the U.S. invasion last year.
Contrary to prewar statements by President Bush and top administration officials, Saddam did not have chemical and biological stockpiles when the war began and his nuclear capabilities were deteriorating, not advancing, according to the report by Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group.
Duelfer's findings come less than four weeks before an election in which Bush's handling of Iraq has become the central issue. Democratic candidate John Kerry has seized on comments this week by the former U.S. administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, that the United States didn't have enough troops in Iraq to prevent a breakdown in security after Saddam was toppled.
The inspector's report could boost Kerry's contention that Bush rushed to war based on faulty intelligence and that sanctions and U.N. weapons inspectors should have been given more time.
Saddam a threat
But Duelfer also supports Bush's argument that Saddam remained a threat. Interviews with the toppled leader and other former Iraqi officials made clear to inspectors that Saddam had not lost his ambition to pursue weapons of mass destruction and hoped to revive his weapons program if sanctions were lifted, the report said.
On Wednesday, Bush cited Saddam's "history of using weapons of mass destruction, a long record of aggression and hatred for America" in calling the invasion the right thing to do.
"There was a risk, a real risk, that Saddam Hussein would pass weapons or materials or information to terrorist networks," Bush said in a campaign speech in Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania. "In the world after September 11, that was a risk we could not afford to take."
Duelfer presented his findings in a report of more than 1,000 pages, and in appearances before Senate committees.
The report avoids direct comparisons with prewar claims by the Bush administration on Iraq's weapons systems. But Duelfer largely reinforces the conclusions of his predecessor, David Kay, who said in January, "We were almost all wrong" on Saddam's weapons programs. The White House did not endorse Kay's findings then, noting that Duelfer's team was continuing to search for weapons.
Duelfer found that Saddam, hoping to end U.N. sanctions, gradually began ending prohibited weapons programs starting in 1991. But as Iraq started receiving money through the U.N. oil-for-food program in the late 1990s, and as enforcement of the sanctions weakened, Saddam was able to take steps to rebuild his military, such as acquiring parts for missile systems.
However, the erosion of sanctions stopped after the September 11, 2001, attacks, Duelfer found, preventing Saddam from pursuing weapons of mass destruction.
Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. |
Soo yea.. a bunch of us in TA ended up been right, and it hurts though. So, Im wondering, How in the world Bush and Cheney can still say that they would do everything over, agaaain?!?!.. Only a psycho would think that way, with all the evidence presented. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| ierxium |
I think Bush said Saddam was a threat anyway or something like that. I don't like quoting presidents but I do know he said something of that sort. Bush and his people should have a plan for a comeback. They need one.
Thanks for the info. Although I'm happy that I was right about my speculations, I feel sad because the statements made will cause a negative reaction outside and inside this country(if there isn't already one). Hopefully I'm wrong. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
nooooooooooo WMD???but that cant be,they had photchoped pictures and lots of maps and to support their cause Iam really shocked :rolleyes:
lets see what those morons have to say now?although I know they'll make up some new bull.:o |
|
|
| Vlad |
| No WMD, oh no, whatever. The point was, as Bush said after the attacks of 9/11... that the US will attack anyone that harbors terrorists in their countries. Iraq being one since Al-Zarqawi, worked out of Iraq. And is most likely the guy behind all of the beheadings which are taking place. |
|
|
| nic01445 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vlad
No WMD, oh no, whatever. The point was, as Bush said after the attacks of 9/11... that the US will attack anyone that harbors terrorists in their countries. Iraq being one since Al-Zarqawi, worked out of Iraq. And is most likely the guy behind all of the beheadings which are taking place. |
We have internal terror threats within the US. Why don't we attack ourselves? |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vlad
No WMD, oh no, whatever. The point was, as Bush said after the attacks of 9/11... that the US will attack anyone that harbors terrorists in their countries. Iraq being one since Al-Zarqawi, worked out of Iraq. And is most likely the guy behind all of the beheadings which are taking place. |
what about all those other countries that harbors terrorists? |
|
|
| Epicurus |
| quote: | | Iraq being one since Al-Zarqawi, worked out of Iraq |
Did you ever notice where he was stationed in Iraq? He was in the northern Kurdish area (mingling with Ansar Al-Islam), which is NOT controlled by Saddam's government. In fact, that area, after the Gulf War, became "autonomous". Saddam's government officially has no power over that region, since the US and the UK made that part of Iraq a no fly/no go zone with regards to the Iraqi government back in 1991.
Christian Science Monitor article
Observer article
There were never any established links between Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. The 9/11 commission said that much and more. If you can find me ONE reliable shred of information that relates any known terrorist or terrorist organization, including Al-Qaeda, that was a direct threat to the US with Saddam Hussein's regime, I'll use Zionist mustard on my turkey sandwich from now on :eek:
Washington Post article
MSNBC article
Edited for links. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by nic01445
We have internal terror threats within the US. Why don't we attack ourselves? |
Apparently you haven't seen the TV show C.O.P.S have you?
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Yoepus |
as for this report two things:
1) Heads should be rolling at CIA
2) Where did the WMD go? |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
2) Where did the WMD go? |
Isreal :tongue3 they've been there all along |
|
|
| malek |
this is no news!!
i've said it all along, they should hire me at the CIA :o |
|
|
| Renegade |
I recommend that you all read the report (available here) or at least the "Key Findings" overview (available here) just to get an idea about how much of a balls-up this really was. Virtually every pre-war claim made by the coalition about Iraq's WMD stockpiles and WMD programs is now demonstrably false. Specifically (all from the overview):
WMDs generally:
| quote: | | Iraq's WMD capability [...] was essentially destroyed in 1991. |
Missile Systems:
| quote: | | The ISG has uncovered no evidence Iraq retained Scud-variant missiles, and debriefings of Iraqi officials in addition to some documentation suggest that Iraq did not retain such missiles after 1991. |
Nuclear Program:
| quote: | | Saddam Hussein ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program. |
Chemical Weapons:
| quote: | | While a small number of old, abandoned chemcial munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter. |
Biological Weapons:
| quote: | | ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new Biological Weapons program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes. |
| quote: | | ISG judges that in 1991 and 1992, Iraq appears to have destroyed its undeclared stocks of BW weapons [sic] and probably destroyed remaining holdings of bulk BW agent. |
| quote: | | In spite of exhaustive investigation, ISG found no evidence that Iraq possessed, or was developing BW agent production systems mounted on road vehicles or railway wagons. |
Future intents:
| quote: | | The former Regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after sanctions. |
| quote: | | Interviews with former Regime officials who were active in Iraq's governing, economic, security and intelligence structures were critical to [sic?] Iraq Survey Group (ISG)'s assessment of the former Regime's WMD strategy. |
The only thing that the hawks can take out of this report is that if left unattended, Saddam Hussein probably would have resumed WMD production programs (which we already knew, given his character). However, the report also states on several occasions that Saddam's goal of producing weapons was "secondary to his prime objective of ending UN sanctions".
So, to answer your question Yoepus:
| quote: | | 2) Where did the WMD go? |
The short answer is that, like I've been saying all along, they were never there to begin with. :) |
|
|
|
|
