Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush to Order WMD Intelligence Probe
Fox News ^ | 02/01/2004 | AP Story

Posted on 02/01/2004 4:40:16 PM PST by Tuxedo

Edited on 04/22/2004 12:38:55 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

The investigation will look at what the United States believed it knew before the war against Saddam Hussein's regime and what has been determined since the invasion. Former chief weapons inspector David Kay has concluded that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction, a chief rationale for the U.S.-led war.


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush; intelligence; itaq; prewarintelligence; wmd; wmdinvestigation
And so it begins....
1 posted on 02/01/2004 4:40:17 PM PST by Tuxedo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
looking for intelligence in Washington is no small task
2 posted on 02/01/2004 4:41:30 PM PST by troublesome creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: troublesome creek
This is disturbing. While I think it was worthwhile to go into Iraq if for no other reason than to rid the world of the Hussein family and stop the mass killings, the pretext was to find WMD, and to date nothing has been found. Did Hussein lie about what he had back in 1991? Did it get moved out to another country?

In an election year, this cannot be a good thing.
3 posted on 02/01/2004 4:44:05 PM PST by Tuxedo (Zed's Dead....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: troublesome creek
LOL yeah.

If anyone's seen the 8,500 liters of anthrax the U.N. had "verified" Iraq possessed (but had never accounted for, despite 11 UN resolutions & a decade of prevaricating), let the U.S. & the world know. Thanks.

Iraq had enough time ....to build a place ...to keep that stuff ...on Mars -- after a delay of 11 yrs+.

It's probably in Syria though.

Does anyone care that Sadam funded suicide-bomber activities in Israel?

That he had an empty airline hull in the desert, to train terrorists (not stewardesses)?

That we found a school house full of suicide bomb vests -headed for Israel (where else?)?

That the Wash Post reported in 2002 'Iraq tried to sell Al Quaeda VXgas'?

I guess those are small WMD. Weapons of Minuscule Destruction.

I guess we'll passively 'find' them - when they've been smuggled out of Syria in a camel's butt - & end up in NYC!!!

:(

4 posted on 02/01/2004 4:54:45 PM PST by 4Liberty ( Run, taxpayers!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Vote no on PROP 56 (Calif.)!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
The investigation will look at what the United States believed it knew before the war against Saddam Hussein's regime and what has been determined since the invasion.

This wily be a process that will take longer than the RATS want and will be secret.

What we have found is, of course, a work in process but what did we believe/fear/know in the Fall of 2002 and why? What did we believe/fear/know in Jan, 2001 and why? What did we believe/fear/know in 1998 and why?

The RATS will only be interested in stuff that could hurt Bush but they want get any here.

5 posted on 02/01/2004 5:19:15 PM PST by Mike Darancette (Proud member - Neoconservative Power Vortex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mike Darancette
Democrats are going to bit in the butt again!!!!
6 posted on 02/01/2004 5:27:21 PM PST by jocko12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
Maybe this could help in the investigation:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Joe Lieberman (D-CT), John McCain (Rino-AZ) and others, Dec. 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I b elieve that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.

"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his contin ued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

7 posted on 02/01/2004 5:42:58 PM PST by gg188
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jocko12
I say the clintonistas are sheetin brix with this announcement.
I know, call in "pardoned" John Deutch and see what he has to say...
8 posted on 02/01/2004 5:46:59 PM PST by jungleboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
You may find it interesting to go to C-Span and listen - watch - the hearing the Senate had with Mr. Kay last week. After listening to the hearing then listen to the news media and the dems (even FoxNews). You say it is disturbing, so do I, but for different reasons.
9 posted on 02/01/2004 6:46:31 PM PST by malia (BUSH/CHENEY '04 NEVER FORGET!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
"America's credibility's at stake," Biden said in a televised interview. "This isn't about politics anymore."

What to make of this statement ? Do they use these lines as throw-aways for effect ? or is this the truth ? either way, it stinks.
10 posted on 02/01/2004 7:10:15 PM PST by stylin19a (Is it vietnam yet ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
Why do we keep needing independent investigations? We PAY our representative to do their job, but they keep saying they need some one else to do it. It frustrates me. Why can't THEY do it? I know it's politics, but it's still wrong.
11 posted on 02/01/2004 7:14:11 PM PST by Angel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
This entire matter ought to be just forgotten. Saddam has been taken down. He should be tried and fried. The world can stop playing around at their so-called investigating because everyone in governments around the world, including the UN, and their grandmothers are going to have to be investigated because it sure seems that a lot of people for a lot of years all agreed that old Saddam had WMD's.

Heck, the dirty bastard, even would rather end up a miserable poverty vermin filled ex-dictator living in a hole than fess up to the world he got rid of his chemical toys. Could of saved us a lot of time and money and most of all our precious American and Coalition troop blood.

I'm simply thinking that for all the caterwauling going on in the democrat party and their pals in the press, that this WMD thing has gone on for so long and everyone bought into it, that holding anyone in government accountable is absolutely absurd.

Just go read what everyone including democrats, and UN folk, et al., said about Saddam and his WMD's.

12 posted on 02/01/2004 8:09:33 PM PST by harpo11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Angel
IT KINDA WORKS LIKE THIS:

The President has a whole range of "spooks"...intel guys, lots of them

They snoop and poop and tell the Pres. what's happenin', ya see?

The Pres tells congress (the folks who hold all kinda hearngs and testimonies and appoint hese spooks the President has at his beck and call)

Congress listens to the poop and tells the Pres to go ahead with his plans (cuz the spoks were all evaluated by congess to start with)

So the President says, "I wanna invade and have me a war thingy, cuz my spooks tell me it's legit to press on".

Congress hears that and says, "Well, them spooks must be right...we evaluated them before appointing them...yeah, Prez....go for it!"

Later, when no evidence or reasonable ratinale for the "war" is found, we need an investigation (by outside sources, of course) because the Prez insists he only did what the spooks told him was up and up; the congess says the Prez shouldn't have been so quick on the draw, and nobody wants to take any blame for anything...so...."a thorough investigation, by an outside agency" (apointed by the same Prez who apointed the sppoks???) has to be!

Great system, eh????????????
13 posted on 02/01/2004 8:30:48 PM PST by NMFXSTC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NMFXSTC
no evidence or reasonable ratinale for the "war" is found

Man, is that ever a load of rat s**t!

14 posted on 02/01/2004 8:37:45 PM PST by Jeff Chandler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
Good!

This has been very ambarassing!
15 posted on 02/01/2004 10:08:24 PM PST by Kay Soze ("If you act like a liberal to get Democrat votes, you can't do something conservative when you win")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler
Gee, Jeff...ya think? Get any chems, nukes, bios? OK, then WTF are we there for? Please...enlighten me!
16 posted on 02/02/2004 5:26:48 AM PST by NMFXSTC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: harpo11
"This entire matter ought to be just forgotten. Saddam has been taken down."

That dog will not hunt. To pretend there wasn't a problem with the pre-invasion "intelligence" will not, and should not, be accepted by US citizens. This also brings into question the whole idea of preemption, especially if the "facts" used to justify a preemptive strike cannot be proven.
Even though Saddam is gone, I can't say the billions spent and US lives lost to oust him were justified (flame retardant suit going on).
17 posted on 02/02/2004 5:42:04 AM PST by familyofman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tuxedo
Are republicans born stupid, or are they continually dropped on their heads when young? The investigation will be used to mine for information against Bush period.
18 posted on 02/02/2004 6:10:23 AM PST by jeremiah (Sunshine scares all of them, for they all are cockaroaches)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NMFXSTC
The threat of WMD is just one component in the rational for ousting Saddam. The connection with terrorism was real, with Saddam subsidizing suicide terror in the Middle East.

He violated the terms of the ceasefire continuously for 12 years and the resolve of the United States was being denigrated in the eyes of the Arab world. Iraq was a poignant object lesson for those in the region.
The United States has no longer the luxury of isolationism in the world after September 11. The Islamic world must take us seriously, and there have to be radical changes in that part of the world. The fruits of the successful invasion of Iraq are already apparent. Kaddafi seems to have gotten the message, and we have gotten the attention of Iran.

BTW, the existence of WMD in Iraq is a certified fact. What happened to them between 1991 and the present has never been determined, so it is a little premature to start shouting democrat talking points from the rooftop.
19 posted on 02/02/2004 7:23:54 PM PST by Jeff Chandler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: familyofman
I agree. I do not think that I should have posted without completing my thought process. Maybe, one beer too many while watching the Super Bowl. ;-)

I'm thankful to hear that President Bush will call for an investigation that goes back prior to his administration. I often wonder what game was at play by all the characters and nations involved, mostly Iraq and the UN and all these resolutions that were ignored.

I have before me many quotes from Democrat Senators all talking about Saddam's WMD's. Apparently, these same people are trying to wiggle out of it, and President Bush shouldn't let anyone off the hook on this.

20 posted on 02/02/2004 7:50:42 PM PST by harpo11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson