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

Skip to comments.

Iraq had WMDs after all
Waterbury Republican-American ^ | November 29, 2006 | Editorial

Posted on 11/29/2006 9:10:21 AM PST by Graybeard58

Buried in a front-page, Bush-bashing tome in The New York Times recently was this: "Experts say that at that time, (Saddam) Hussein's scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away."

"That time" was 2002. So if the experts are right, Iraq could have joined the atomic club in 2003.

That was the year President Bush and Congress decided the Hussein regime posed intolerable risk to world security and authorized an invasion by a U.S.-led coalition. Hussein was deposed and an uneasy, violent transitional period, demonstrably too long for American attention spans (see Nov. 7 election results), ensued.

That the Times hid this nugget 13 paragraphs into a 37-paragraph article is instructive. What the Times found important was the Bush administration placed 15-year-old technical nuclear information, written in Arabic, on a government Web site available to anyone. The liberal newspaper de-emphasized the near certainty that Iraq would be a nuclear entity today if the war the left insists never should have been fought had, in fact, never been fought.

It's true invading troops found no weapons of mass destruction, aside from a few Iran-Iraq war artifacts presumably left on various battlefields and in concealed ammunition dumps forgotten by the Hussein regime. But Iraq had built and used WMDs before, and captured documents prove the existence of a conspiracy to build such weapons.

It all comes down to time, opportunity and motive. Hussein's Iraq knew how to build nukes, as well as chemical and biological weapons, in 2002. If there had been no war, Iraq would have had the time and the opportunity to build and deploy them. And there was plenty of motive: a suspicious and unfriendly West; a deadly rival to the east, Iran; and a nuclear Israel that had used an airstrike to smash an earlier attempt by Iraq to join the atomic club.

And what might the United States have done about Iraq's nuclear ambitions in 2003 or 2004, with Hussein still in power? It would have had two choices: Negotiate from a position of relative weakness; or wait for something terrible to happen and respond in kind. One need not stretch the imagination far to conclude the Iraq war, for all its horrors and frustrations, is better than the unspeakable alternative.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 11/29/2006 9:10:21 AM PST by Graybeard58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mosquewatch.com; litehaus; gogogodzilla; A Balrog of Morgoth; dirtboy; nutmeg; NavVet; Leisler; ...

Ping to a Republican-American Editorial.

If you want on or off this ping list, let me know.


2 posted on 11/29/2006 9:11:31 AM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Well, well, well............ it's not news unless the MSM says so.


3 posted on 11/29/2006 9:12:06 AM PST by Lando Lincoln (Democrats: The marriage of ignorance and arrogance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

bump


4 posted on 11/29/2006 9:13:00 AM PST by nuconvert ([there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business] (...but his head is so tiny...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Interesting... thanks for the ping FRiend. :o)


5 posted on 11/29/2006 9:13:15 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Interesting that this would appear in the NYT after the election. Just a coincidence, I'm sure...


6 posted on 11/29/2006 9:13:46 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StarFan; Dutchy; alisasny; BobFromNJ; BUNNY2003; Cacique; Clemenza; Coleus; cyborg; DKNY; ...
ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

7 posted on 11/29/2006 9:14:00 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

The rest of the world knew about this in 2004.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3872201.stm



A few of us knew it in 2003...


8 posted on 11/29/2006 9:14:07 AM PST by Triggerhippie (Always use a silencer in a crowd. Loud noises offend people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty

Marking


9 posted on 11/29/2006 9:16:39 AM PST by Running On Empty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

And meanwhile traitors within the administration AGAIN leak classified documents to undermine the war/rebuild effort.


10 posted on 11/29/2006 9:17:37 AM PST by visualops (artlife.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Is it possible that Saddam had completed the atomic bomb and it was smuggled to Syria when the war started?


11 posted on 11/29/2006 9:19:05 AM PST by The Blitherer (Fight On!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Hope I'm wrong but I think this refers to a poorly written sentence by a NYT reporter in an article several weeks old now. The reporter referred to a 2002 report that stated Iraq was very close to building a nuke in 1991 but the sentence was so poorly written folks assumed he meant the nuke was close to completion in 2002.

If this isn't the same report, apologies.


12 posted on 11/29/2006 9:20:39 AM PST by saganite (Billions and billions and billions-------and that's just the NASA budget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

If this is true (and I've heard it before), then we invaded and deposed Saddam just in time.


13 posted on 11/29/2006 9:29:53 AM PST by Allegra (Can't Talk Now...I'm Busy Looking for That Civil War the Media Keeps Talking About)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

ping


14 posted on 11/29/2006 9:33:45 AM PST by ocr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

How long will the Treason Media get away with its cover-up. What did it know and when did it know it?


15 posted on 11/29/2006 9:41:26 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Experts say that at that time, (Saddam) Hussein's scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.

Based on what? How and when did they get the fissionable material? Where were they storing it? Or did they plan to go out and pick some up when everything else was finished?
16 posted on 11/29/2006 9:52:37 AM PST by xenophiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saganite

hmm... I wonder why the folks writign this editorial didn't check that?


17 posted on 11/29/2006 9:57:52 AM PST by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/optimism_nov8th.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I remember reading about the deliveries of centrifuge parts for the centrifuges Saddam would require to enrich uranium being halted at the Iraq-Turkey border back in 2002 or 2003.

Combine that with Saddam's business dealings with Niger to acquire unenriched uranium, and hopefully most of us can put 2 and 2 together.


18 posted on 11/29/2006 9:58:21 AM PST by BaBaStooey (I heart Emma Caulfield.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

How long will it be before the MSM puts this story on the tube via their innocuous 6:30 Evening "News" shows? If my guess is correct most of us who are alive today won't live long enough to see that happen.


19 posted on 11/29/2006 10:01:55 AM PST by epow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

If this editorial is referring to the mis-reported NYT article I think it is there were a lot of folks who made the same mistake this writer has made including some prominent radio talk show hosts.

Of course, I could be wrong and this may be another NYT article.


20 posted on 11/29/2006 10:05:09 AM PST by saganite (Billions and billions and billions-------and that's just the NASA budget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

One national security think tank believed that Saddam had outsourced his nuclear program, sending money and technicians to Libya, since Iraq had been crawling with UN inspectors. Of course, Libya gave up their nuclear program, which means that what they were abandoning was their cooperation in Saddam's program. And with Saddam deposed, the program couldn't go on any longer anyway.


21 posted on 11/29/2006 10:08:46 AM PST by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln

bump for later


22 posted on 11/29/2006 10:10:43 AM PST by quikdrw (Life is tough....it's even tougher if you are stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

The information contradicting the "conventional wisdom" of the MSM on Saddam's WMD is out there for anyone to see, but it takes some effort to put the entire picture together. I blame the Administration for doing a horrible job in presenting the full picture of Saddam's WMD program circa 2002 to the American people. When the Iraq Survey Group concluded that there were no stockpiles of WMDs, hence no evidence of an ongoing program, the Administration shrugged its collective shoulders and said, essentially, "Opps."


23 posted on 11/29/2006 10:12:06 AM PST by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

It is sickening.


24 posted on 11/29/2006 10:14:34 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

Their post-invasion public relations has been pathetic. It's sad that we've reached the point we are at today.


25 posted on 11/29/2006 10:17:22 AM PST by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: xenophiles

Sept 1998: Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Sen McCain: "Mr Ritter, is it true that UNSCOM has intelligence that states Iraq has three Nuclear Weapons Assemblies but lacks only the fissile material to make them operative?"
Scott Ritter: "Yes".


26 posted on 11/29/2006 10:17:45 AM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Now all you have to do is prove it to the new legislature's satisfaction.


27 posted on 11/29/2006 10:18:16 AM PST by Logic n' Reason (Don't piss down my back and tell me it's rainin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Maybe Michelle Malkin from the Hartford Courant will pick this up?

Or Mary McCrory?

How About Colin Macinroe from WTIC-AM??

Surely Diane Smith from Positively Connecticut will speak of this with Ray Dunaway??

...(groan)....


28 posted on 11/29/2006 10:23:51 AM PST by RaceBannon (Innocent until proven guilty: The Pendleton 8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper; justshutupandtakeit

In 2004, I started collecting public reports, readily available on the Internet, verifying the existence of Saddam's WMD program. I'd collected numerous bits of information, but largely gave up the project because I'd come to the conclusion -- why should I knock myself out trying to defend the Administration's original intention in invading Iraq to take-out Saddam's WMD capability, when the Administration wasn't bothering to defend itself? It is sickening, and it is the greatest mystery in this whole Iraq operation.


29 posted on 11/29/2006 10:27:51 AM PST by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Very interesting.


30 posted on 11/29/2006 10:29:49 AM PST by Chewie84
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

Many of us are aware of the dozens, if not hundreds, of reports from the major media throughout the 90s specifying the danger Saddam posed. It was hysterical about the prospect of al queda linking up with Saddam. It revealed his Salman Pak terrorist training center complete with airliner for practice. Clinton bombed Iraq in 98 claiming he was hitting Saddam's NBC factories and sites. Cohen and Dick Clarke claimed the Sudanese pharmacuetical plant was part of Saddam's weapons system.

Since Bush decided to actually DO something about it all has disappeared down the Memory Hole. But WE still remember.


31 posted on 11/29/2006 10:32:49 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (If you believe ANYTHING in the Treason Media you are a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

They also had chem and bio weapons. But no one in the MSM wants to talk about it.


32 posted on 11/29/2006 10:37:54 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit

Precisely. This is why I consider the left in this country *evil* -- they conveniently forget what was considered solid evidence during the Clinton era, simply for the sake of gaining some political advantage over a Republican President. But, again, the real fault lies with the Administration which went to war to deny Saddam, and ultimately al Qaeda, access to WMDs, and then has done nothing to back-up its original claims, and has done nothing to refute the constant drumbeat for the last three years on the left that "Bush lied, people died."


33 posted on 11/29/2006 10:51:25 AM PST by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

bump


34 posted on 11/29/2006 12:50:04 PM PST by JerseyJohn61 (Better Late Than Never.......sometimes over lapping is worth the effort....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

why should I knock myself out trying to defend the Administration's original intention in invading Iraq to take-out Saddam's WMD capability, when the Administration wasn't bothering to defend itself? It is sickening, and it is the greatest mystery in this whole Iraq operation.

It's almost as if the Bush administration has been working for the Dems.


35 posted on 11/29/2006 1:19:34 PM PST by freedomfiter2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
........the Administration wasn't bothering to defend itself? It is sickening, and it is the greatest mystery in this whole Iraq operation....

Bush: Not a bad President at all, but an incompetent communicator who has done a great deal of harm to his party, and has absolutely sacrificed many of those who still wish him well.

We still wish him well because it's best for our country, but he surely doesn't make it easy... or pleasant.

36 posted on 11/29/2006 3:02:57 PM PST by Kenny Bunk (Let us all gather together on the lawn to bid Karl Rove a fond "Adios, Amigo!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

One begins to wonder.


37 posted on 11/29/2006 3:06:05 PM PST by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Too late.

And besides, this administration has no desire to fight this issue.


38 posted on 11/29/2006 3:08:00 PM PST by airborne (MERRY CHRISTMAS!!! Jesus is the reason for the season!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

bump


39 posted on 11/29/2006 3:08:32 PM PST by lesser_satan (EKTHELTHIOR!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
Well, well, well............ it's not news unless the MSM says so.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''


I view the MSM as an apolitical tool of whomever controls it. Presently, that happens to be the socialistic, liberal left. If the nation swings appreciably right, which appears to be the case, the MSM will reluctantly swing with it as it struggles to stay relevant. It's interesting to me that I have seen a number of conservatively written stories coming out of this Blue State publication in recent weeks. it might be a sign of the times. No pun intended (smile)

I don't think we should hate on their leftist ranting, I think we should take them over and turn them into conservative beacons of truth. They might even be able to turn a profit with capitalists running them.(smile)
40 posted on 11/29/2006 3:18:18 PM PST by photodawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: visualops

And meanwhile traitors within the administration AGAIN leak classified documents to undermine the war/rebuild effort.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

The NYT is going down in flames and wants to take America down with her. They should be prosecuted for their treasonous conduct during this war.


41 posted on 11/29/2006 3:20:36 PM PST by photodawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

Maybe Michelle Malkin from the Hartford Courant will pick this up?
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Michelle is not from the Courant, she is a nationally syndicated columnist.


42 posted on 11/29/2006 3:22:33 PM PST by photodawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: photodawg
It's interesting to me that I have seen a number of conservatively written stories coming out of this Blue State publication in recent weeks

The Waterbury Republican-American in Waterbury, Connecticut is one of the most consistently conservative newspapers in the country and it's not a new thing, I've been posting their editorials for years.

43 posted on 11/29/2006 3:28:52 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: photodawg; nutmeg

you're right, I was thinking of Michelle JACKLYN, the columnist who slandered us from back in 2000!!

got me, thanks!


44 posted on 11/29/2006 4:35:23 PM PST by RaceBannon (Innocent until proven guilty: The Pendleton 8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

sad but interesting point.


45 posted on 11/29/2006 4:36:09 PM PST by RaceBannon (Innocent until proven guilty: The Pendleton 8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
So... no fissionable material, but "intelligence that states" that Iraq had three assemblies. Well that's a start, but even if we suppose that this intelligence is correct (and I haven't seen photos of these assemblies (and please don't list reasons why someone with such photos wouldn't want to show them to me, it proves exactly nothing)), that doesn't put Iraq "on the verge". I possess some laboratory glassware, lacking only a few kilograms of smallpox to have a functioning biowarfare arsenal, but that doesn't put me "on the verge".
46 posted on 11/30/2006 12:17:02 PM PST by xenophiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58; melancholy
If only they'd report on something we did not already know!!

:-)

Nancee

47 posted on 11/30/2006 12:18:42 PM PST by Nancee ((Nancee Lynn Cheney))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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