Smoking in the Background - The Bush administration sits on some telling documents (Saddam's Iraq).

NRO ^ | December 21, 2005 | Deroy Murdock

[freema]

Ping.

[processing please hold]

It sure looks that way. That Karl Rove is a genius. :-)

[freema]

Bush not only isn't 'using' the information, he out and out said in one of his last speeches - something to the effect - 'we were wrong on WMD.'

[processing please hold]

If Iran goes nuclear, they will protect Syria.

[processing please hold]

You're right he did say that. Then what would be your guess of what he's sitting on?

[jonrick46]

You have affirmed my thinking and beat me making your same point in your post.

What I praise is the skill that the Bush Administration has kept information hidden about the true situation of Saddam's WMDs. Time will tell.

When Syria offers to take Iran's nuclear weapons, we see an interesting parallel. Iran may be the next to go--either by US action or Israeli.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

I suspect they know where they went and they are waiting, gathering intelligence, making connections, before moving in (probably to Syria). They don't want to tip their hand. Just a guess, though.

[numberonepal]

“decision to operate.”

This sends a cold sweat down my back and a shiver up my spine.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

I agree. See my post 27.

Releasing the information would mean having to move in to gain control of those WMDs, which means invading a country we haven't declared war on...yet.

The Dems are either too stupid or too treasonous to consider this possible and keep their mouths shut about it and let the President run the WOT. Nope. They just gotta shove their greedy faces on the TV and try to promote themselves.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

However, with the news that's been coming out of Australia regarding their troubles with the Lebanese, I don't think we're going to find an ally or even an appreciative face in that country when we take care of that corner.

[T. Buzzard Trueblood]

The Bush administration inexplicably suppresses such papers. They reject requests for unclassified files from Hayes, America’s most broadly published expert on Hussein’s terrorist credentials. Hayes, who generally supports the president on Iraq, is flummoxed: “The Bush administration seems remarkably uninterested in discovering, now that we have reams of material from Saddam’s regime, what the actual terror-related and WMD-related activities of that regime were.”

???????????

[processing please hold]

Saddam's Personal Involvement in WMD Planning www.iraq.net ^ | 10/09/04

Posted on 10/09/2004 1:20:26 PM CDT by TexKat

Here's saddam himself discussing WMD's.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1240158/posts

[processing please hold]

He had 'em.

I don't know what Bush means when he said he was wrong about the WMD's.

[freema]

WMD.

[processing please hold]

Huh?

[pawdoggie]

I think that there's probably a question of "provenance" (or the perception thereof) with at least some of these documents insofar as they were "discovered" and/or translated by friendly Iraqis. If the Administration were to suddenly flood the news media with documents which purported to show that nearly everything we believed about prewar Iraq was, to some extent, true, the MSM boys (and their Left-Wing Democrat friends) would say in unison, "well, isn't that just so convenient".

[piasa]

Because that which involved Iraq is intertwined with ongoing investigations into a global proliferation network whose reach we have not yet determined, and which may yet require some covert diplomatic and or military creativity on our part, which is likely to be more successful if done by surprise. By releasing info we have on Iraq we could inadvertantly tell others what we know about their activities, giving them time to prepare.

[Nasty McPhilthy]

To say that you know it....

indicates how you found out.

[Political Junkie Too]

Why?

To set a new tone in Washington?

-PJ

[truth_seeker]

"Could they be saving ammunition for the 2006 election ?"

That would be my take. He declares his policies were right and justified by (this declassified) evidence made public, and timed for the fall elections.

If events in Iraq continue favorably; government is successfully "stood up"; troop drawdowns continue, etc.

Bush declares success and ask voters to strengthen his ability to protect America, by electing Republicans. Republican candidates rn on strong defense "platform" (RNC talking points).

Contrasts nicely against wobbly and inconsistent democrats.

I see the long term WOT in a serial fashion: One country at a time, by whatever means is necessary.

If that means force is needed elsewhere, after Iraq, it is best to be winding down in Iraq first.