Iraq had no WMD: the final verdict

[emad]

Julian Borger in Washington
Saturday September 18, 2004
The Guardian

Snip

The comprehensive 15-month search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has concluded that the only chemical or biological agents that Saddam Hussein's regime was working on before last year's invasion were small quantities of poisons, most likely for use in assassinations.

A draft of the Iraq Survey Group's final report circulating in Washington found no sign of the alleged illegal stockpiles that the US and Britain presented as the justification for going to war, nor did it find any evidence of efforts to reconstitute Iraq's nuclear weapons programme.

It also appears to play down an interim report which suggested there was evidence that Iraq was developing "test amounts" of ricin for use in weapons. Instead, the ISG report says in its conclusion that there was evidence to suggest the Iraqi regime planned to restart its illegal weapons programmes if UN sanctions were lifted.

Charles Duelfer, the head of the ISG, has said he intends to deliver his final report by the end of the month. It is likely to become a heated issue in the election campaign.

More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1307529,00.html

[saigon68]

1. WHAT NEVER EXISTED

Can't be found

[emad]

2. As in "the president's brain is missing"

or military service records.........

[saigon68]

7. You are right about his brain

Some would argue that he was never issued much of one, in the first place, however.

[wrate]

11. If it was only *'s brain that is missing, but about 50% of Americans

are brainless too.

[leftchick]

16. 60%....

I am really begining to think it is that bad....

[mbperrin]

3. Amen, saigon68! And that would include Repub

humanitarian feelings!

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Or could not be planted

remember that story of the 1st ID blasting friendlies who where ahead of the main column and the 1st ID CO being relieved over that fiasco?

There are days I wonder if those were nto the planters?

Oh they were an Intelligence Unit, what the hell was an Intelligence Unit doing ahead of the tip of the spear?

[Uzybone]

4. well well what a suprise!

n/t

[Gregorian]

6. So can we start the war crimes tribunal now?

Why wait and let him start another war? Why wait? It's OUR country. And WE are the ones losing, every day this criminal gang is in office. Even I knew there were no WMD. Why do you think we all marched in the streets?

Get out of the White House now!

[0007]

19. Very soon now!

Building some new additions at the Hague.

Can 'ya believe Slobodan Milosevic's trial is still going?

[The Straight Story]

8. Would it have mattered had they been found really?

People would have claimed they were planted if they had been found and that it was all a bush plot like mihop 9/11 - so now we have some who believe he plotted the whole 9/11 attack but didn't plant a single wmd?

In this whole topsy-turvy world I can only wonder what it would have mattered at all had we found any weapons. Either you hate bush and will claim anything he does/finds is a lie and psy-ops/conspiracy or you're a bush-bot and believe everything he does/says is gospel.

Sometimes all the things I read here (and other places) makes my head spin. Several were sure we would find them quick because he planted them, it was all a bush setup. Now he dosen't find them and looks like an idiot -same idiot, different day :) It was lose-lose from the get-go , no matter whether found or not there was already a reason made to bash him on it. Either they were planted or he lied.

To me neither is being productive and clouds the real issue - he is incompetent. He didn't plan 9/11, he missed it. He didn't find wmd because they weren't there, he listened to what he wanted to hear from intelligence and ignored the rest. He has selectively analyzed and used data for his own agenda instead of looking at the big picute. Narrow minded, incompetent, and caring only about a small sliver of the populace - it's not a conspiracy, it's an idiocy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. from International Law it matters

they are found the war is justified, they are not found, the war is illegal

It is that simple

[The Straight Story]

12. Which is part of the point I guess

Ya think bush, the brilliant mastermind behind everything bad going on in the world, would have taken a few minutes to have someone plant a few (and with the vast conspiracies I have seen bouncing around he probably has about a million willing bots to do it and never breathe a word of it).

It comes down, to me, is bush a brilliant master of world conspiracies going back to the nazi era or he is simplistic minded dupe? How hard would it be, when you have your own troops all over the damn place, to plant some chemical/nuclear weapons? It would make the people back home feel better, kick the international nay sayers in the arse, and make him look good in many other ways. And he has had a ton of time to do it.

He has the motive and the ability to do it - so the question I want answered is: why hasn't he planted them?

[havocmom]

10. So, do we decend on O'Liely and force him to live up to his promise

to attack the malAmdinistration for lies?

[Octafish]

13. Yeah, but they were THINKING about 'em!

And that makes them GUILTY in Smirko world.
And you know what happens to guilty people in Smirko world...

"No! Not the cornfield! Not that! No! No!!!! Aaaaaaagh!"

[peterh]

14. Ok….we’ve had the Kay report….

Now we have the Duelfer…..and they both say the same friggin’ thing….NO WMD….

We have upwards of maybe 14,790 Iraqi civilians killed since occupation while about 5,000 in mass graves have been found prior…..the question shouldn’t be whether the world is better off without Hussein, but whether the Iraqis are better off under the twit

[ozymandius]

15. Why We Know Iraq is Lying - By Condoleezza Rice

Why We Know Iraq is Lying
By Condoleezza Rice

Originally appeared in the New York Times on January 23, 2003

WASHINGTON. Eleven weeks after the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution demanding yet again that Iraq disclose and disarm all its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, it is appropriate to ask, "Has Saddam Hussein finally decided to voluntarily disarm?" Unfortunately, the answer is a clear and resounding no.

-cut-

For example, the declaration fails to account for or explain Iraq's efforts to get uranium from abroad, its manufacture of specific fuel for ballistic missiles it claims not to have, and the gaps previously identified by the United Nations in Iraq's accounting for more than two tons of the raw materials needed to produce thousands of gallons of anthrax and other biological weapons.

Iraq's declaration even resorted to unabashed plagiarism, with lengthy passages of United Nations reports copied word-for-word (or edited to remove any criticism of Iraq) and presented as original text. Far from informing, the declaration is intended to cloud and confuse the true picture of Iraq's arsenal. It is a reflection of the regime's well-earned reputation for dishonesty and constitutes a material breach of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, which set up the current inspections program.

-cut-

Many questions remain about Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and arsenal and it is Iraq's obligation to provide answers. It is failing in spectacular fashion. By both its actions and its inactions, Iraq is proving not that it is a nation bent on disarmament, but that it is a nation with something to hide. Iraq is still treating inspections as a game. It should know that time is running out.

Condoleezza Rice is the National Security Adviser.

[leftchick]

17. thank you for the reposted reminder ozymandius

God knows our "journalists" won't bring this up..... :eyes:

[RebelOne]

18. All I can say is "Oh, duh," like we didn't know that

from the beginning of this illegal war.

[StevieM]

20. I thought they might find modest quantities of chemical weapons

Stuff like mustard gas, which the Germans were using back in World War I (I still think that it should be called the Great War, it wasn't as much of a world war as WWII was). In other words, I thought that Saddam was in violation of a UN resolution. Saddam was in violation of other UN resolutions, so if that was the issue then it shouldn't matter.

The question should have been: Was Iraq in any position to be acquiring nuclear weaopons? The term WMD has put Chemical and biological weapons on the same level as nukes. That is not correct.

Saddam was nowhere close to having nuclear weapons, or even large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, if you want to use the lesser standard. And we did know this going in.

Since 1991 Saddam's arsenal and military had been decimated. There was the Gulf War (including a 5 1/2 week relentless air campaign), there was the sanctions, there were the inspectors destroying weapons and there were the Clinton 98 airstrikes. Saddam's military was in shambles and it was getting worse. This guy was no threat to us.

Now, that doesn't mean he wasn't a bad person, just that there was no clear and present danger, or even an upcoming danger. Not in Iraq.

Today, thanks to President Bush*, there very much is a danger in Iraq. A danger that has already claimed the lives of over 1000 Americans.

Steve

[struggle4progress]

21. kick

:kick: