Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A Chain of lies on WMD

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 02:59 PM
Original message
A Chain of lies on WMD
Just follow the bouncing rationale....

February 24, 2001

We will always try to consult with our friends in the region so that they are not surprised and do everything we can to explain the purpose of our responses. We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place, but we are always willing to review them to make sure that they are being carried out in a way that does not affect the Iraqi people but does affect the Iraqi regime's ambitions and the ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and we had a good conversation on this issue.

Secretary Colin L. Powell
Cairo, Egypt (Ittihadiya Palace)


http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm

January 29, 2002

Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens -- leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections -- then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.

States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.

We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. (Applause.) And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.

We'll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons. (Applause.)

The President's State of the Union Address
The United States Capitol
Washington, D.C.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html



August 26, 2002

The case of Saddam Hussein, a sworn enemy of our country, requires a candid appraisal of the facts. After his defeat in the Gulf War in 1991, Saddam agreed under to U.N. Security Council Resolution 687 to cease all development of weapons of mass destruction. He agreed to end his nuclear weapons program. He agreed to destroy his chemical and his biological weapons. He further agreed to admit U.N. inspection teams into his country to ensure that he was in fact complying with these terms.

In the past decade, Saddam has systematically broken each of these agreements. The Iraqi regime has in fact been very busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents. And they continue to pursue the nuclear program they began so many years ago. These are not weapons for the purpose of defending Iraq; these are offensive weapons for the purpose of inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam can hold the threat over the head of anyone he chooses, in his own region or beyond.

On the nuclear question, many of you will recall that Saddam's nuclear ambitions suffered a severe setback in 1981 when the Israelis bombed the Osirak reactor. They suffered another major blow in Desert Storm and its aftermath.

But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. Among other sources, we've gotten this from the firsthand testimony of defectors -- including Saddam's own son-in-law, who was subsequently murdered at Saddam's direction. Many of us are convinced that Saddam will acquire nuclear weapons fairly soon.

Remarks by the Vice President
Veterans of Foreign Wars 103rd National Convention


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/08/20020826.html



January 28, 2003

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)

The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council to convene on February the 5th to consider the facts of Iraq's ongoing defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups.

We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.

The President's State of the Union Address
The United States Capitol
Washington, D.C.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html



WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2003



Distancing himself from remarks by Vice President Cheney, President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — disputing an idea held by many Americans.

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties," the president said. But he also said, "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the Sept. 11" attacks.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/18/iraq/main584234.shtml


Jan.08, 2004

WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Colin Powell reversed a year of administration policy, acknowledging Thursday that he had seen no “smoking gun concrete evidence” of ties between former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.

Powell, speaking at a news conference at the State Department, stressed that he was still certain that Iraq had dangerous weapons and needed to be disarmed by force, and he sharply disagreed with a private think tank report that maintained that Iraq was not an imminent threat to the United States.

“I have not seen smoking gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I do believe the connections existed,” he said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ID/3909150/



Jan. 22, 2004

Vice President Dick Cheney says the hunt in Iraq for weapons of mass destruction will go on and he insists that there were ties between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. In an interview with NPR's Juan Williams, Cheney also says the United Nations has a potential role to play in Iraq's political transition.

Cheney says the United States hasn't given up on finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which was one of the major arguments President Bush made in going to war to topple Saddam. Cheney cites an interim report by David Kay, who led the WMD search, as saying that the Iraqi government had programs designed to produce such weapons. "I think the jury is still out...," Cheney says.

http://www.npr.org/display_pages/features/feature_1610113.html

Sunday, Jan. 25, 2004

Secretary of State Colin Powell held out the possibility Saturday that prewar Iraq may not have possessed weapons of mass destruction.


Powell was asked about comments last week by David Kay, the outgoing leader of a U.S. weapons search team in Iraq, that he did not believe Iraq had large quantities of chemical or biological weapons.

"The answer to that question is, we don't know yet," Powell told reporters as he traveled to this former Soviet republic to attend the inauguration Sunday of President-elect Mikhail Saakashvili.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/1/24/200416.shtml

Feb.05, 2004

President Bush acknowledged Thursday that the United States had not found the banned weapons that his administration believed were in Iraq, but he defended the war as “the right thing” to do.

“We have not yet found the stockpiles of weapons that we thought were there,” Bush said in a speech at the Port of Charleston in his clearest acknowledgment of problems with prewar intelligence on Iraqi weapons.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4180021/

Apr 13, 2004

Q Mr. President, I'd like to follow up on a couple of these questions that have been asked. One of the biggest criticisms of you is that whether it's WMD in Iraq, postwar planning in Iraq, or even the question of whether this administration did enough to ward off 9/11, you never admit a mistake. Is that a fair criticism? And do you believe there were any errors in judgment that you made related to any of those topics I brought up?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think, as I mentioned, it's -- the country wasn't on war footing, and yet we're at war. And that's just a reality, Dave. I mean, that's -- that was the situation that existed prior to 9/11, because the truth of the matter is, most in the country never felt that we'd be vulnerable to an attack such as the one that Osama bin Laden unleashed on us. We knew he had designs on us, we knew he hated us. But there was a -- nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government, could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale.

The people know where I stand. I mean, in terms of Iraq, I was very clear about what I believed. And, of course, I want to know why we haven't found a weapon yet. But I still know Saddam Hussein was a threat, and the world is better off without Saddam Hussein. I don't think anybody can -- maybe people can argue that. I know the Iraqi people don't believe that, that they're better off with Saddam Hussein -- would be better off with Saddam Hussein in power. I also know that there's an historic opportunity here to change the world. And it's very important for the loved ones of our troops to understand that the mission is an important, vital mission for the security of America and for the ability to change the world for the better.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040413-20.html


Fri Aug 27,11:37 AM ET


In what The New York Times said was the US president's first acknowledgement on the issue, Bush said he made a "miscalculation of what the conditions would be" in postwar Iraq.


He said the miscalculation was an unintended byproduct of a "swift victory," adding that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s forces quickly went into hiding in Iraqi cities where they mounted a rebellion far faster than the Americans had anticipated.


The daily said Bush refused to go into detail on what went wrong, saying that it was a task best left to historians.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040827/pl_afp/us_vote_bush_040827153753

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RobertSeattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good Summary - thanks
Too bad Bush couldn't be honest and say, "Heck, I wanted to invade from Day 1 as President - 9/11 gave me good marketing material to do so."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. What Galls Me, Is that The KNEW There were no WMD!
And used that to defend keeping the UN economic sanctions against Iraq in place. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobertSeattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. As a former troop...
This is somewhat trivial, but I'd be might pissed about being required to where the damn MOPP suit (Chemical Protective Suit) for weeks on end in the desert when way up the chain they knew nothing was there.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC