What I don't understand is why Dubya and Co. haven't highlighted the work of
Kenneth A. Pollack more.
As a weapons policy analyst in the Clinton Administration, Pollack developed the scenario that Saddam was developing "just in time" systems for making chem/bio WMDs. This was
to be done by a rapid reconfiguration of pharmaceutical plants that Saddam got
permission to build after Gulf War I.
Thus Saddam wouldn't be caught red-handed by inspectors with stockpiles of
WMDs...and as soon as the world looked away and/or Saddam/Uday/Quasay decided to lash out...
the plants could turn out the dangerous/unstable Chem/Bio WMDs on a "just in time"
manner.
Pollack made a number of TV appearances before Op. Iraqi Freedom, but has basically
disappeared from view since then.
His book on the case for going ahead with overthrowing Saddam is here:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0375509283/qid=1075428434/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-6828299-7416066?v=glance&s=booksLooks like Pollack did a Scott Ritter too--he writes a 528-page book and repudicates it here (apparenlty referring to a mea culpa article he wrote in Atlantic Monthly within the past month or so):
The Real State of the Union
Although it's a Clark campaign site, it appears that what it says about Pollack is accurate. How about this gem:
In closing he (Pollack) urged that "we should recognize that the Administration's rush to war was reckless even on the basis of what we thought we knew in March of 2003. It appears even more reckless in light of what we know today.
If I were so wrong to the tune of 528 pages, I would at least have the self-preservation instinct not to tell the world I was COMPLETELY stupid. There NOTHING in those 528 pages that supports going to war? What a maroon.