Posted on 04/29/2006 5:41:26 PM PDT by jmc1969
In the months leading up to the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein did try to cooperate with United Nations inspectors, a decision that, paradoxically, helped convince the West that he was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
By late 2002, Saddam finally tilted toward trying to persuade the international community that Iraq was cooperating with the inspectors of Unscom (the United Nations Special Commission) and that it no longer had W.M.D. programs. Saddam was insistent that Iraq would give full access to United Nations inspectors "in order not to give President Bush any excuses to start a war."
Ironically, it now appears that some of the actions resulting from Saddam's new policy of cooperation actually helped solidify the coalition's case for war.
What was meant to prevent suspicion thus ended up heightening it. The tidbit about removing the term "nerve agents" from radio instructions was prominently cited as an example of Iraqi bad faith by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in his Feb. 5, 2003, statement to the United Nations.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
It's always so sad when a murderous butchering dictator gets misunderstood.
ROTFLMAO.......LOL....hahahahahahaha.... ahhhhhh, LOL.....those paper reporters, they are a hoot.
THIS IS TOO FUNNY!!!!!!
I'm remembering that song from the 1970's, "OH, LORD, PLEASE DON'T LET ME BE MISUNDERSTOOD!"
"In the months leading up to the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein did try to cooperate with United Nations inspectors"
Bull. He was just stringing them along. This was just the latest in a pattern of attempts to stall action by the UN.
I don't believe a single word the Times says on this subject.
Leave it to the NYTimes to come to the aide of Saddam! Unbelievable.
The NYT.....Batboy Central...
"1970's"
60's. The Animals.
And yet, to the troglodytic numbnut retards at the Slimes, Bush is a BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD man !
This is just too funny!
It's impossible to be offended by something that's so ludicrous.
FMCDH(BITS)
Gosh, even Hans Blix was complaining about Saddam's restrictions.
More NYTimes revisionism.
Eric Burdon and the Animals. Good stuff at the time. Yes, I'm old too.
FMCDH(BITS)
I'm so woneweyyyyyy!!!
The New York Times is attempting to revise history... It isn't enough to just attack the President; they have to justify their attacks by making it look like history was different than it actually was. They need to make the Iraq war look like an unnecessary war. If they can’t do that, then in the end Bush was right to invade and all of their pathetic reporting turns out to be just a bunch of crap.
Poor guy. I mean, except for the gassings and the genocide and the torture and the mass executions and the government-sponsered rape programs, what did Saddam do that was so wrong?
No.
You 're overqualified.
Screw that rag of a paper. I no longer even think of it as anything else but the loony Bush Bash Daily. NOT news by any means.
OMG. Maybe he can be Hillary's running mate huh?
HeeHee!!these guys are a hoot!!!http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:b-Wp5EcKGaQJ:209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1000696/posts+NYT+stalin+misunderstood&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=opera mash here for more!
Who is Batboy endorsing this year?
I would say it's a classic.
Yeah.. we misunderstood the rape rooms, the child prisons, the nerve gassings, the feeding of opponents in to wood chippers..
how could we be so insensitive?
You poke sand up a wildcat's butt, and when he turns on you in fury, you try to say, "I've quit.....let's call it off......I don't really want to fight...."
Good luck with that!
Uhhhh! Noooo!! They are trying to promote diversity......They have a building full of soiled, bus station retards! They are looking for a train station, nit-wit urinator, though......
I would rather go with the capitalist way of dealing with trash companies. You just need to have a little patience.
Yes he did indeed. He misunderstood because of the false sense of support he thought he had from all those "hire-a-mob" leftist nuts there were protesting the USA instead of the United Nations and Iraq before the war began. Instead of carrying signs saying "Open Up To The UN Inspectors".. there were signs that read "Bush, the Number One Terrorist".
They blame Bush for the War. As stupid as Saddam was... I have and always will blame the liberals for the Iraqi War. And deep down inside, I think they actually wanted it.
So the production of missiles in violation of U.N. mandated range limitations was Saddam's method of cooperating? Yeah, right.
Uh?
As I recall reading, Saddam did an eleventh-hour switcheroo, with our buddies the Russian's helping move the WMDs to Syria. Also remember the many delays in holding Saddam accountable by our chums in the U.N. Clearly, this is the polar opposite of trying "to cooperate".
However, my Freeper friends, rather than argue with the pitiful fiction in the NYT piece, let's look at the larger picture - - the objective of the NYT mendacity.
I suspect very strongly that the political officers at the NYT want further to weaken our President (and our country). By pretending that Saddam was trying to cooperate with the U.N., they may add another propaganda prop, but the big picture isn't Saddam, it's (and I can't think of a better word) subversion.
Tag Line Alpha
Democrats - - the party of blames, lies, accusations, and subversion. The once great party of Roosevelt now chooses Stalin.
.
The Slimes - a big player in the Culture of Treason.
You 're overqualified.
That's what my mom figured. I guess the fact that I drool wouldn't help...would it?
FMCDH(BITS)
I think that all of the murdered Kurds, Shiites, Iranians, and Kuwaitis understood him all too well.
Liberals are always very happy to stand up for the oppressed as long as they don't actually have to do anything.
NYT Blues:
Oh, Lord, it's hard to make payroll
When no one believes what you wrote
No matter how much it's perfumed
It still smells like a garbage dump goat
Those pit-bulls at Free Republic
Just love to ruin my day
Oh, Lord I know that I'm honest
But it just don't come out that way.
(Apologies to Mac Davis)
That's really good!
Thanks! :)
Wow....they're into Damage Control a little early for November....
Have these idiots read the Duelffer Report?
It continues to amaze me just how stupid and dishonest the mainstream press is. The truth is whatever they want it to be - getting the facts to the public doesn't matter.
The lyrics are good, but I don't know the song.
The NYT is still Stuck On Stupid.
The NY Slimes must be trying to get another pulitzer for their pathetic panty waist reporters. This one is too much even for the defenders of Stalin.
Although the NY Times represents views which are antithetical to the spirit of liberty and the principles of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, the First Amendment is too important to trash in order to silence its pages.
The marketplace could do that in a few months by simply not buying the paper.
Thomas Jefferson often was criticized by the newspapers of his day, but he understood the importance of a free press. He said:
"The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."
ATTRIBUTION: Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), U.S. president. Letter, January 16, 1787, to Edward Carrington. The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, vol. 11, p. 49, ed. Julian P. Boyd, et al. (1950).
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.