THE OTHER IRAQI WMD THREAT

American Foreign Policy Council ^ | Editor: Ilan Berman

[tlrugit]

In recent months, the United States has weathered scathing international criticism for its inaccurate assessment of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction capabilities. But a new warning from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has showcased a different kind of WMD danger from the former Ba’athist state. According to the UN atomic watchdog, security lapses at Iraqi nuclear facilities have led to the extensive “removal” of radioactive materials by rogue elements. The assessment, formally submitted to the United States three weeks ago by IAEA Director Mohammed ElBaradei, cautions that WMD-related equipment and “contaminated” materiel from Iraq – including “yellowcake,” a radioactive material that can be used to make a nuclear weapon – has begun to turn up in various places in Europe, and could be acquired by terrorist groups seeking WMD capabilities. (Jerusalem Post, April 15, 2004)

[John H K]

The idea of "Yellowcake" being a WMD is laughable.

It's like calling a hunk of iron a machine gun.

[First_Salute]

There seems to be no substantial evidence to suggest that Saddam Hussein would have not supplied WMD materials to his terrorist comrades, as have the North Koreans.

That, and Saddam's habit of violating several parts of the 1991 Cease Fire, maintained the state of war against Iraq.

Given that Syria and Iran are state sponsors of terrorism, and they are also suppliers of weapons and WMD materials to terrorists, and they also buy such materials from North Korea.

Given that Afghanistan was an open sanctuary for terrorists.

Given that Pakistan was headed down the road of becoming a state sponsor for nuclear terrorists.

Given the attacks upon the United States by terrorists supported by said terrorist states and by high-ranking officials in the governments of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Given that all such operations are heavily supported by the Axis of the Axis of Terrorism, namely fascist socialists, both foreign and domestic (in the U.S.A. and in Israel).

I would not have invaded Iraq on the expectation of finding actual nuclear weapons, and I said so, way back at the beginning of all this.

Yet, I would have invaded Iraq because of the above situation facing us, and to be on the borders of Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.

I believe, on that point, President Bush has performed very well, and it is very much to his credit, that he has given these countries a chance to get revelation, so to speak.

If a nuclear weapon of any kind, is used against the United States or our Allies, I'll take that as first, all bets are off and only unconditional surrender is our opponents' only option if they mean to live at all, and second, I will openly be at war with socialists on the home front, because they are traitors in support of Arafat, in support of Saddam, in support of North Korea, the Red Chinese, the North Vietnamese, Cuba, and fascist socialism that is, again, the Axis of Terrorism.

Full and relentless prosecution of such a world-wide glut of terrorists, until their unconditional surrender.