No mystery to untangling WMD puzzler

How could U.S. officials have been so wrong about something so important -- the stockpiles of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that we now know never existed?

You may recall that when two oddly equipped flatbed trailers were found in northern Iraq last spring, U.S. officials jumped to claim them as mobile labs used to make anthrax and other weapons.

"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories," President Bush boasted at the time. "And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."

In reality, it was the president who was wrong. As retiring chief weapons inspector David Kay admitted last week, the trailers that we flaunted before the world to justify our invasion have turned out to be harmless facilities that produced hydrogen to fill weather balloons.

How could we make such an embarrassing mistake? Well, the initial claim that Iraq possessed mobile weapons labs came from the same source as so much of our faulty intelligence: Iraqi defectors, a group with a long history of telling us whoppers about highly advanced nuclear programs, smallpox research -- anything that might goad us into invading. The CIA knew all too well that such sources were often tainted, yet it went ahead and cited the mobile labs as fact, with no physical evidence to corroborate the claim.

Why? Without a thorough investigation, we have only conjecture. But mobile labs did serve a convenient purpose for U.S. policy-makers, who were scrambling to explain why U.N. inspectors weren't finding anything in Iraq.

"We know that Iraq has at least seven of these mobile, biological agent factories," Secretary of State Colin Powell told the United Nations in February. "The truck-mounted ones have at least two or three trucks each. That means that the mobile production facilities are very few, perhaps 18 trucks that we know of. There may be more. . . . Just imagine trying to find 18 trucks among the thousands and thousands of trucks that travel the roads of Iraq every single day."

Now skip ahead a few months to the discovery of the two trailers. Here another glaring weakness in U.S. intelligence comes into play. We did not investigate to see what the trailers were; we investigated to prove that they were weapons labs. In other words, the conclusion was preordained.

Kay, who was a strong supporter of the war, offers a compelling example of that blindness at work. Last May, before his appointment to head the U.S. weapons search, he was working as an expert analyst for NBC News and was given the chance to inspect one of the trailers firsthand. He immediately proclaimed them proof that Saddam Hussein had been producing biological weapons.

"Literally, there's nothing else you would do this way on a mobile facility," Kay told the world. He also rejected the suggestion that the trailers might have been simple hydrogen facilities, claiming that it "didn't pass the laugh test."

Inevitably, a lack of trust and coordination among U.S. agencies also plays a role, as it has throughout this episode. In late May, the CIA released a "white paper" admitting that it had no evidence that the trailers were used to create germ weapons. "We nevertheless are confident that this trailer is a mobile BW [bioweapons] production plant," the agency said. The CIA reached that conclusion without consulting the State Department's intelligence bureau, and a few days later, State concluded that the CIA report had little basis in fact.

Why did CIA professionals release a white paper on the trailers prematurely, a paper that even to laymen seemed to ignore conflicting evidence and distort the available data? Well, they were responding to a request from the White House, which at the time needed help in fending off doubts about our failure to find WMD.

That gives us the final piece of the puzzle: Intelligence was corrupted for political purposes, not just in the Case of the Two Trailers, but in almost every aspect of our intelligence effort.

In reality, it was the president who was wrong.

Oh really Mr. Newspaper Writer? Let's examine the issue of why we went to war. The following is something I posted earlier today on the thread "Ex-U.S. Arms Hunter Kay Says No Stockpiles in Iraq" (Reply No. 140 to ThatsAllFolks2). The whole thing may not be completely relevant to this thread, but it does show that Iraqi possession of actual WMD agents was not the only reason for going to war, and why the president had no other choice than to make the decision that he did...

You asked for multiple examples of President Bush saying the threat from Iraq was not imminent, so here goes. Please take the time to read them, being mindful of the time and context in which they were made, and keeping in mind that not only did previous U.S. administrations believe that Hussein had WMD, but so did the U.N. and the intelligence agencies of France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and numerous others.

You can quibble with some of these quotes if you like; however, taken as a whole, they show the president’s rationale for war. I would also ask that you read Charles Krauthammer’s excellent op-ed piece from today’s Washington Post entitled “Calling Iraq’s Bluff,” which is posted here at FR.

“The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder. We will meet that threat now, with our Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard and Marines, so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of fire fighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities.”
[President Bush’s Oval Office address, March 19, 2003, as U.S.-led campaign begins in Iraq]

Yes, we will meet the threat now before it is imminent, so we don’t have to experience another 9/11 or worse.

"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?"
[President Bush’s State of the Union address, January 28, 2003]

Note that the president did not answer “some” by saying the threat is imminent.

“Intelligence from multiple sources shows that Iraq is continuing efforts to deceive inspectors by moving weapons of mass destruction material around the country to avoid detection.”
[White House press release, March 6, 2003]

A thread throughout the debate preceding the Iraq campaign was that other countries and the U.N. also believed that Hussein had WMD, not just the Bush administration. Of course, opponents of Hussein’s ouster minimize this. Also, WMD “material” would include production equipment, reference strains, delivery systems, etc., not only the actual BW or CW agents.

“In 1991, Security Council Resolution 688 demanded that the Iraqi regime cease at once the repression of its own people, including the systematic repression of minorities -- which the Council said, threatened international peace and security in the region. This demand goes ignored.
“In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolutions 686 and 687, demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. Last year the Secretary General's high-level coordinator for this issue reported that Kuwait, Saudi, Indian, Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Bahraini, and Omani nationals remain unaccounted for -- more than 600 people. One American pilot is among them.
“In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolution 687, demanded that Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism, and permit no terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke this promise. In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organizations that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments. Iraqi dissidents abroad are targeted for murder. In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former American President.
“In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge.
“From 1991 to 1995, the Iraqi regime said it had no biological weapons. After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks. U.N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
“United Nations' inspections also revealed that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons.
“And in 1995, after four years of deception, Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. We know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993.
“Iraq also possesses a force of Scud-type missiles with ranges beyond the 150 kilometers permitted by the U.N. Work at testing and production facilities shows that Iraq is building more long-range missiles that it can inflict mass death throughout the region.
“We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in his country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic, and the facts lead to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger…But Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts [sanctions, oil-for-food program, Coalition air strikes] and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. The first time we may be completely certain he has a -- nuclear weapons is when, God forbids, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming.”
[President Bush’s address to the United Nations, September 12, 2002]

Notice the use of the word ‘gathering’ in the last paragraph. A ‘gathering’ danger is not an imminent danger, but rather one that is forming, much like the proverbial ‘gathering storm.’ Also, the reason I highlighted certain passages above is to show that possession of actual WMD agents was not the sole purpose for the administration’s efforts to remove Hussein. His regime was in violation of nearly every major tenet of the 1991 cease-fire accords, and as Mr. Krauthammer pointed out astutely in his article I mentioned above, the U.N. was losing its resolve to maintain sanctions that prevented Iraq from further expanding its WMD research and production programs.

“The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime's own actions -- its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror. Eleven years ago, as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi regime was required to destroy its weapons of mass destruction, to cease all development of such weapons, and to stop all support for terrorist groups. The Iraqi regime has violated all of those obligations. It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. It has given shelter and support to terrorism, and practices terror against its own people.”
[Speech by President Bush, Cincinnati, October 7, 2002]

Here is the text from the Cincinnati speech you cited. Note that the president mentions a “drive toward an arsenal of terror,” and again, not possession of actual WMD agents or an imminent threat.

Taken as a whole, these statements show that President Bush was not presenting a case for war based on an “imminent” threat, or even based solely on an alleged Iraqi possession of stockpiles of WMD agents.

Sure, his administration like its predecessors, and the U.N. and the intelligence services of most countries involved in the debate, believed that Hussein did possess such weapons, and only time will tell if there is validity to such beliefs given the size and scope of the land mass and weapons caches to be searched. However, the WMD research and production facilities that have been discovered, along with the ballistic missile and unmanned aerial vehicle programs that have also been confirmed, and the numerous violations of the 1991 cease-fire agreements, were also presented as reasons for the necessity of Hussein’s removal before the threat he represented became imminent, so we would not “have to meet it later with armies of fire fighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities.” Thank you for your time.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.