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

Skip to comments.

Iraq's WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says
http://www.nysun.com/article/26514 ^ | IRA STOLL

Posted on 01/26/2006 12:55:39 AM PST by mal

The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.

The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, "Saddam's Secrets," released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.

"There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands," Mr. Sada said. "I am confident they were taken over."

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


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; prequel; sada; saddam; syria; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-154 next last

1 posted on 01/26/2006 12:55:40 AM PST by mal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mal

that's where i have always thought they were. remember when we were getting ready to head over there again, the lines of semi's with trailors heading for Syria? what the heck did everyone think was in there???


2 posted on 01/26/2006 1:05:39 AM PST by ferri (Be Politically Incorrect: Support the Constitution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mal
Thanks for warning them JAY ROCKEFELLAR.
3 posted on 01/26/2006 1:16:25 AM PST by jslade (Liberalism ALWAYS accomplishes the exact opposite of it's stated intent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mal
I heard that this guy appeared on Hannity and Colmes last evening. Anyone know what kind of coronary Colmes suffered?
4 posted on 01/26/2006 1:17:56 AM PST by kublia khan (Absolute war brings total victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kublia khan
Hannity's liberal opposite number was not Colmes. I think it was Bob Beckel.

Here is a link.

(steely)

5 posted on 01/26/2006 1:27:03 AM PST by Steely Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

thanks


6 posted on 01/26/2006 1:41:03 AM PST by kublia khan (Absolute war brings total victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Beckel is so full of it , his eyes are brown .
For him to term conservatives as 'blowhards' is truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
I was hoping Hannity would remove his shoe and smack the moron in the mouth with it....
7 posted on 01/26/2006 1:44:14 AM PST by injin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mal

Syria seemed obvious to me, but I have to wonder if this guy is just selling books..


8 posted on 01/26/2006 1:46:43 AM PST by SeaBiscuit (God Bless all who defend America and Friends, the rest can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mal

Well, duh. Known this for years.


9 posted on 01/26/2006 1:47:48 AM PST by CholeraJoe (Canada' s Conservative. That's the fourth sign of the Apocalypse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


10 posted on 01/26/2006 2:07:28 AM PST by DoughtyOne (01/11/06: Ted Kennedy becomes the designated driver and moral spokesperson for the Democrat party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mal
Another opportunity for the MSM to gloss over/ignore a story that in any way supports Dubya and his decision to remove Saddam.

Move along...nothing to see here...

I can see the glaring lack of press coverage on this as I type!

11 posted on 01/26/2006 2:07:59 AM PST by borisbob69 (Old shade is better than new shade!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mal

Everyone knows this, but Libs won't admit it. It's more important to vilify the US President who's moving heaven and earth to protect free people.


12 posted on 01/26/2006 2:18:17 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mal

I'm still amazed by those who make the claim that saddam didn't have WMD's, since our military couldn't "find them". Of COURSE they are in Syria- or the Pakistani border, or Egypt, or Lebanon, or somewhere ELSE where we could not get at them. Saddam was a monster, but never accused of being stupid.
That claim could certainly be made against those in this country who gleefully (and stupidly) mug for the camera and ask "where are the WMD's"?
My favorite question to one of them is WHAT do THEY think a WMD IS? And what is it they imagine killed all those Kurds?


13 posted on 01/26/2006 2:45:56 AM PST by 13Sisters76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jslade
"Thanks for warning them JAY ROCKEFELLAR."

You got that right! We also owe a great big thank you to the U.N. and especially France and Germany for dragging their heals for almost a year, delaying us before we could catch Hussein red handed. Another big thank you has to go to the establishment media and the Hollywood glitterati.

All of these bums were on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of humanity.
14 posted on 01/26/2006 2:50:32 AM PST by dbehsman (NRA Life member and loving every minute of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 13Sisters76
Of COURSE they are in Syria- or the Pakistani border, or Egypt, or Lebanon, or somewhere ELSE where we could not get at them. Saddam was a monster, but never accused of being stupid.

It make no sense to me. What's the purpose of having WMD's if you don't use them to protect your sovereignty? I must be thinking like a Westerner because it seems plenty stupid from where I sit.

15 posted on 01/26/2006 2:54:13 AM PST by ThirstyMan (hysteria: the elixir of the Left that trumps all reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan
Maybe the Iraqis had not developed a suitable method to deploy the weapons, yet.
16 posted on 01/26/2006 3:02:15 AM PST by Preachin' (Enoch's testimony was that he pleased God: Why are we still here?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan
That's a very good question. I don't know what Hussein was thinking pre-liberation. I do know that some of our guys dug up a few jet fighters that had been buried in the desert since 1991.

I think Hussein may have been thinking to himself that he knew he wouldn't win in a war against the United States. If he got the weapons out of the country, he could then appeal to the United Nations to have him reinstated as president of Iraq. Also it would be a little bit of egg on the face of the U.S. to the rest of the world if the weapons were not found. If Hussein used the weapons during the liberation, then he would have lost all moral high ground and lost any chance to appeal to the U.N.
17 posted on 01/26/2006 3:27:19 AM PST by dbehsman (NRA Life member and loving every minute of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 13Sisters76
I'm still amazed by those who make the claim that saddam didn't have WMD's, since our military couldn't "find them".

And I'm amazed at people who make the claim that Saddam Hussein did have WMDs despite the fact that they haven't been found. When a country wages a "pre-emptive" war against another country like the U.S. has in this case, it is up to the U.S. to prove that the basis for that war was legitimate . . . and wild speculation about where these so-called WMDs are does not amount to proof in any sense of the word. Quite frankly, I think anyone who believes that a head of state would move his most effective means of defense outside his country -- while he himself crawled down a hole as an invading army toppled his regime -- is pretty damned naive.

I'd also point out that this war was a dismal failure on the part of the U.S. if we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of U.S. lives over these WMDS -- only to have them spirited out of the country without our knowledge.

18 posted on 01/26/2006 3:43:24 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Leave a message with the rain . . . you can find me where the wind blows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kublia khan

I heard his uterus was ruptured.


19 posted on 01/26/2006 3:47:50 AM PST by johnny7 (“Iuventus stultorum magister”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

If it could have been proven that they originated in Russia, wich I believe they were, then it was a must that we did not find them in Iraq. If you remember, it was the Russians that moved them to Syria and we allowed them to do it.


20 posted on 01/26/2006 3:50:19 AM PST by eastforker (Under Cover FReeper going dark(too much 24))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

What a totally ignorant post....


21 posted on 01/26/2006 3:50:26 AM PST by RVN Airplane Driver (Most Americans are so spoiled with freedom they have no idea what it takes to earn and keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mal

I've been saying this since before the invasion of Iraq... it was obvious then and is obvious now. Of course people thought I was crazy, but I'm used to that.


22 posted on 01/26/2006 3:50:58 AM PST by thoughtomator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Moved WMDs is not a wild speculation at all, given that it is the standard Russian client state M.O., and we have satellite pics of convoys from Iraq to Syria in the weeks leading up to the war. The very rational reasons for that behavior have been rehashed many times already... I suggest you go back and review what is known about Saddam's WMD strategy, and the fact that he did something very similar before the Gulf War, moving his airforce abroad for safety.


23 posted on 01/26/2006 3:54:14 AM PST by thoughtomator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mal
HORRORS!!

It would seem a pair or two of ladies' panties are what's needed to garner the information on their whereabouts.

24 posted on 01/26/2006 3:54:43 AM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Quite frankly, I think anyone who believes that a head of state would move his most effective means of defense outside his country...is pretty damned naive.

I guess you've forgotten that Saddam sent his entire air force to "safety" in Iran in the first Gulf War. How many of those planes did he get back?

25 posted on 01/26/2006 3:56:04 AM PST by Fresh Wind (Democrats are guilty of whatever they scream the loudest about.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Naturally, WMD were never really the main reason for the war, but EVERYONE in the world believed they were there, and they were dangerous so everyone agreed it was safe to use them as a talking point. Nonetheless, I always cringed when I heard someone say "WMD" prior to the war.

Stopping nuke terror required changing world politics and inserting ourselves into that part of world. That was a fairly inevitable and predictable outcome on the pre-9/11 path we were on before. Preventing our families and civilization from being reduced to charred, screaming cinders justfies a lot. Most people simply have no clue, no clue whatsoever how close we came.

Stratfor.com has a lot more on this, if you'd like to check it out. The book they sell has the gory details; very scary.


26 posted on 01/26/2006 4:04:56 AM PST by Wiseghy ("You want to break this army? Then break your word to it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Give it up.

Mr. LaRouche will never by president.

27 posted on 01/26/2006 4:05:16 AM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jslade
Doesn't anyone remember the hoops the Dems in Congress made the President go through to go to war in Iraq? You gotta have hearings. You've gotta go the U.N. You've gotta build a coalition. You can't go it alone. You've gotta go back to the U.N. We've gotta have more hearings.

Saddam had, at minimum, 6 months of advanced warnings, thanks to the Democrats in Congress and media, that we were going to attack. OF COURSE, there were no WMD's there.

If you were in his shoes, you would've gotten them out of the country as quickly as possible too. First, to insure they stayed in friendly hands at a minimum. Second, to have the opportunity to retain them if the war turned politically, and you somehow remained in power. Third, to "lose the evidence" to provide a black eye to your attacker.

It would be nice if you could hear ONE ANALYST put two-and-two together, but everyone is too worried about preaching how "Bush lied".

28 posted on 01/26/2006 4:08:30 AM PST by cincinnati65 (Go Panthers!.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Been on DU again, have ya?


29 posted on 01/26/2006 4:22:47 AM PST by wolfcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DevSix; Sarajevo

Ping


30 posted on 01/26/2006 4:27:28 AM PST by GarySpFc (De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I guess all the rest of us are pretty damned naive then.


31 posted on 01/26/2006 4:44:58 AM PST by Sender (As water has no constant form, there are in war no constant conditions. -Sun Tzu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

How is a book written by a member of Saddam's inner circle "wild speculation?"


32 posted on 01/26/2006 4:55:58 AM PST by eastcobb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
And I'm amazed at people who make the claim that Saddam Hussein did have WMDs despite the fact that they haven't been found.

Image hosting by TinyPic Image hosting by TinyPic Image hosting by TinyPic
Nothing to see here citizens, move on.

33 posted on 01/26/2006 5:00:40 AM PST by kanawa (Freaking panty wetting, weakspined bliss-ninny socialist punks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
When a country wages a "pre-emptive" war against another country like the U.S. has in this case, it is up to the U.S. to prove that the basis for that war was legitimate

I believe the weight of evidence supporting the war was based on Iraq's past actions, rather than on their potential actions.

Quite frankly, I think anyone who believes that a head of state would move his most effective means of defense outside his country -- while he himself crawled down a hole as an invading army toppled his regime -- is pretty damned naive.

I don't believe Saddam ever intended to use any WMDs against the US on a field of battle. Rather, their purpose was to establish his position locally as a major warlord and tribal chieftan, and perhaps to be used in terror acts at a time of his choosing. Indeed, he might have succeeded if Osama had not shot his wad on 9/11, as the world was leaning toward easing sanctions on Iraq based on the bribe-driven UN influence, after which time he could reconstitute the suspended nuke operations and recover his bio and chemical weapons from their hiding places. The events of 9/11 screwed that up for him, because it put the US into active mode against terrorists and thugs.

When Saddam hid his WMD and himself, I think he truly believed that the war would blow over and he would regain power. He still does believe that.

I'd also point out that this war was a dismal failure on the part of the U.S. if we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of U.S. lives over these WMDS -- only to have them spirited out of the country without our knowledge.

I do not consider it a dismal failure, since the goal of regime change has been accomplished, Saddam's nuclear ambitions have been foiled permanently, and the US has shown that as a nation it will indeed back up its words with actions.

34 posted on 01/26/2006 5:01:35 AM PST by SlowBoat407 (The best stuff happens just before the thread snaps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

DId a DU'er hijack a Freeper's account?


35 posted on 01/26/2006 5:03:40 AM PST by TheBattman (Islam (and liberalism)- the cult of Satan and a Cancer on Society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: borisbob69
I can see the glaring lack of press coverage on this as I type!

Me too, sigh.

36 posted on 01/26/2006 5:04:19 AM PST by Reborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mal

Let's see, some possibilities:
a) Saddam didn't have any WMDs.
b) He had them but secretly destroyed them.
c) He moved them to Syria or elsewhere.
d) He hid them and killed everyone who knew where.

-Choice 'a' (the MSM's chosen position) is stupid because even the mumbling, bungling UN found them.
-Choice 'b' is stupid given the PR value he could have gained if he documented their destruction and then asked for the sanctions to be lifted-hell, he might've pulled it off.
-Choices 'c' and 'd' are far more probable.


37 posted on 01/26/2006 5:05:01 AM PST by libertylover (Bush spied. Terrorists died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
And I'm amazed at people who make the claim that Saddam Hussein did have WMDs despite the fact that they haven't been found. When a country wages a "pre-emptive" war against another country like the U.S. has in this case, it is up to the U.S. to prove that the basis for that war was legitimate . . . and wild speculation about where these so-called WMDs are does not amount to proof in any sense of the word.

I suppose thousands of dead Kurds is not evidence enough for you.
38 posted on 01/26/2006 5:06:36 AM PST by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the occupation media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
And I'm amazed at people who make the claim that Saddam Hussein did have WMDs despite the fact that they haven't been found.

But... but... they will be found any day now.... yawn....

39 posted on 01/26/2006 5:07:49 AM PST by killjoy (Same Shirt, Different Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RVN Airplane Driver
Yep, Alberta's Child is smoking crack again.
40 posted on 01/26/2006 5:09:33 AM PST by OKIEDOC (There's nothing like hearing someone say thank you for your help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mal
Wow. What an article. I sure wish other people in Iraq step up to the plate the way he did!
41 posted on 01/26/2006 5:14:47 AM PST by hawkaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot
LOL, Saddam and Sons were innocent and contained indefinitely, you know!
42 posted on 01/26/2006 5:15:47 AM PST by roses of sharon ("I would rather men ask why I have no statue, than why I have one". ) (Cato the Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I suppose the 12 IED's found earlier in the war with sarin gas shells are NOT WMD's? Yeah, they were there....my kid was involved with one of those incidents.
Do ya also think that the "oil-for-weapons" program had a little to do with moving WMD's? I'll bet it would be somewhat embarrassing for good-old Saddam to have those weapons found with "made in France, Germany, or Russia" stamped all over them!


43 posted on 01/26/2006 5:21:05 AM PST by MountainDad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; Wiseghy

I also never thought WMD's to be the primary reason for the regime change.

I thought that W's mission was more to change the entire complexion of the Middle East. I think he feels that is necessary if Islamic terrorism is ever to be eradicated and its threat of setting off WMD's in America to be removed. Saddam was a logical first target in such a quest for several reasons, not the least of which was his obvious danger to the world in general.

Also, IMO, the thing would have been over a long time ago, except for the more or less constant moaning about how badly things are going there by the Democrat Pary and by the media. The terrorists read this stuff too, and take hope from it, and keep going.

Having said all that, hasn't W himself already come out and as much as said that there were no WMD's in Iraq anyway?


44 posted on 01/26/2006 5:29:39 AM PST by Sam Cree (absolute reality) - ("Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"Leave a message with the rain . . . you can find me where the wind blows. Judging by your remarks there's not much left to find.

England, Germany and France intelligence also believed Iraq had WMD. So did the Clinton administration including WJC-the pervert, AlGore and Madeline Halfbright. WMD were used by Iraq against its Kurd citizens. This is a fact not conjecture. Thus, Iraq did have WMD before the 2003 war and before 9/11. There is no viable counter argument to these facts.

Since in 3 years we have found little-or-no evidence of their continued existence in Iraq, that means they're 1) still buried somewhere in country or, 2) they were secreted outside the country. The correct answer may be both 1 and 2 but the idea that they were transferred to Syria is not a worthless consideration.

Finally, the idea that the war is a dismal failure is specious. Although we have yet to find the WMD, Iraq has been liberated, Saddam is on trial for his life. The Iraqi people have voted not only for their Constitution but a representative government. AQ is clearly on the run in Iraq as well as elsewhere: 1) Just the fact that Sunni Muslims now have turned against Zarqawi is evidence of this; 2)We may have taken out Zawahiri on the 14th as well as other top AQ leaders; 3) AQ has yet to accomplish another attack on the American mainland although on is certainly possible. To pin the war's success or failure on the issue of WMD is not only shortsighted but unsupportable logic. If you wish to be a player in the world of logic and reason, you have to do better than this!

45 posted on 01/26/2006 5:55:37 AM PST by bcsco ("The Constitution is not a suicide pact"...A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Wiseghy

What book would that be?

Thanks for the link.


46 posted on 01/26/2006 6:00:48 AM PST by angcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: jslade

Jay Rockefeller IS to blame, and it was treason.


47 posted on 01/26/2006 6:02:20 AM PST by tioga (Speaking out from the god-forsaken frozen tundra of the Hildebeast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan

.....What's the purpose of having WMD's if you don't use them to protect your sovereignty?.......

Saddam did not expect invasion by American troops. He did expect a higher level inspections. He moved the WMD to avoid detection by inspectors thinking he would retrieve them once the heat was off.


48 posted on 01/26/2006 6:05:45 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. Slay Pinch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mal
Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, "Saddam's Secrets," released this week.

Will he be on 60 Minutes Sunday?
[/Rhetorical Question off]

49 posted on 01/26/2006 6:07:32 AM PST by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Quite frankly, I think anyone who believes that a head of state would move his most effective means of defense outside his country

Saddams WMDs were of little military value against American troops well-prepared for WMD attacks. And if Saddam had used WMDs, all possible European resistance to the American invasion would have vaporized.

Whereas shortly after the Iraq War, an al Qaeda attack against Annan, Jordan was thwarted - one that allegedly was going to use chemical weapons in a plot to kill 80,000 people. Where did those weapons come from, AC? Think it's just a coincidence that the attacks were to originate from Syria and the Bekaa Valley?

50 posted on 01/26/2006 6:16:37 AM PST by dirtboy (My new years resolution is to quit using taglines...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-154 next last

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