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

Skip to comments.

Did Saddam’s WMD Go to Syria? Part II
Flopping Aces ^ | 06-19-07 | Scott Malensek

Posted on 06/19/2007 11:06:17 AM PDT by Starman417

In December 2002, Russia’s Middle East envoy, Yevgeny Primakov (former Russian Intelligence Chief), flew to Baghdad under the front of making one last chance for peace with the dictator. As soon as his plane landed, it was allegedly loaded with “sensitive materials” and flown directly to Belarus. People speculate as to whether or not it was WMD, WMD equipment, documents, people, or things the Russians didn’t want the US to get their hands on, but in any event…the plane was loaded with things the US wanted. He also allegedly brought Russian GPS jammers to confuse American satellite-guided bombs, night vision goggles, special anti-tank missiles, and Russian advisors.

American forces found the jammers, and that’s no secret since the Air Force was happy to boast that the jammers were ineffective (USAF just boosted the signal from their satellites so that it was “louder” than those from the jammers).

Syria and Russia both sent night-vision sights and goggles to Iraq, and they were recovered by American forces.

The anti-tank missiles did stop an Abrams tank and kill its crew. Others reportedly were ineffective, but evidence of their use is indisputable given the unique signature that their shaped charge left on the tanks that were hit.

Two Russian Generals, Gen. Vladimir Achalov, a former commander of airborne and rapid-reaction forces, and Gen. Igor Maltsev, a leading expert in air defense systems were reported in Baghdad up until 6 days before the war. During their “visit” they were photographed being given medals by Iraqi Defence Minister Sultan Hashim Akhmed. Other smiley photographs include the two Russian Generals standing with head of the General Staff of the Iraqi Army Izzat Ibragim between them. Upon their return to Russia, the generals were asked why they went on a “last-chance” diplomatic mission. They replied, “We didn't fly to Baghdad to drink coffee.” One wonders if all the elements of the story were proven true, could the claim of “special weapons” being moved out be less true than the other elements?

Immediately after the arrival of the Russians in Baghdad, retired USAF Lt Gen. James R Clapper Jr-then head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency-monitored an increasing flow of traffic and communication from Iraq to Syria. Former head of the UN’s WMD inspection group, UNSCOM, Richard Butler, was asked to review the imagery. He agreed that Iraq appeared to be moving weapons out of Iraq, but did not think that “the Iraqis wanted to give them to Syria, but…just wanted to get them out of the territory, out of range of our inspections.” Syria was prepared to be the custodian of them.” The entire idea was nearly identical to when Saddam sent his entire air force to Iran for safe-keeping during Desert Storm.

Israeli intelligence (flush with human intelligence sources in the region-particularly in Syria, and Lebanon) reported that the increased traffic was Saddam’s repositioning of WMD to Syria. On December 23, 2002, Ariel Sharon stated on Israeli channel 2 television, "Chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria.” About three weeks later, Israel's foreign minister repeated the accusation. The U.S., British, and Australian governments issued similar statements.

Opponents to the war like to point to the 1000+ pages of the Duelfer Report and summarize it as “NO WMD,” but there’s a lot more to Moby Dick than 5 letters. Not even an elementary school student would dare turn in a 5-letter book report on Melville’s epic. Similarly the ISG’s report contains a lot more than just “NO WMD.” It is a resounding verification that, yes, there was a great deal of ‘something’ secreted out of Saddam’s Iraq into Syria. While the ISG doesn’t claim that it was in fact WMD in those trucks, it does leave that door open because of the clandestine nature and the assembly areas for the convoys that left Iraq for Syria would be consistent with WMD, WMD equipment, documentation, and even personnel.

Given that there is so much evidence that Saddam’s illegal weapons, programs, documents, and equipment existed and were moved rather than did not exist and were destroyed, it seems that logic has turned. There’s simply more evidence it was moved than there is any evidence of WMD destruction. Yet, the debate from those who oppose prefers to ignore evidence and pretend that fictional evidence of destruction exists. That door to reality is creaking open for the opposition, and as such it’s no wonder that the anti-war movement is shattering, the Democratic Party is spinning, and opponents to the war are confused.

Part one here.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; mapwmd; russia; syria; wmd; wmdmap

1 posted on 06/19/2007 11:06:23 AM PDT by Starman417
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Starman417

I’m not at liberty to answer...


2 posted on 06/19/2007 11:11:20 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

What did Sadam get out of the deal?


3 posted on 06/19/2007 11:12:43 AM PDT by Augustinian monk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Keepin’ dis one...bump


4 posted on 06/19/2007 11:15:23 AM PDT by Edgerunner (If leftists don't like it, I do. Keep your powder dry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk
What did Sadam get out of the deal?

Hung.

5 posted on 06/19/2007 11:18:46 AM PDT by Just another Joe (Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk
"What did Sadam get out of the deal?"

F*cked by the Russians.

6 posted on 06/19/2007 11:18:54 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

If only that last line were really true.

Unfortunately, I don’t think it is, but I hope I’m wrong.


7 posted on 06/19/2007 11:19:16 AM PDT by bolobaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

As much as I love him, Bush has been piss-poor at communicating with and leading the American people.

He has allowed his opponents to define him and that in turn has left him and our troops vulnerable.

If we could have only kept the support of the majority of Americans in this war on terror and pushed forward HARD, we would be finished by now. Instead we let Kennedy & Reid & Pelosi and Durbin et.al. cause us to waver.

Of course there were WMD’s...he had already used them 3 times...but the media convinced many otherwise.


8 posted on 06/19/2007 11:21:25 AM PDT by Former MSM Viewer ("We will hunt the terrorists in every dark corner of the earth. We will be relentless." W 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
"....Yet, the debate from those who oppose prefers to ignore evidence and pretend that fictional evidence of destruction exists. That door to reality is creaking open for the opposition, and as such it’s no wonder that the anti-war movement is shattering, the Democratic Party is spinning, and opponents to the war are confused...."

I don't agree with that. The naysayers have won the propaganda war. If they found anything or a high level Syrian defects with evidence of what Iraq stored there. It would be dismissed as planted evidence and lies.

9 posted on 06/19/2007 11:24:17 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

The thing that no one has explained, however, is if Saddam had a WMD program and that program was then handed over to Syria, why didn’t Saddam ever use WMDs- except back during the Reagan administration.

If he had a program, why were none ever deployed to invade Kuwait, or to defend Kuwait once occupied, or to defend Iraq once they were driven from Kuwait, or why they were never used while we kept Saddam under our thumb during the 1990’s or during the invasion this time around. If they are in Syria, why didn’t the Syrians use them against the Israelis or Lebanese Army during the hostilities in Beiruit last summer or smuggle some back into Iraq to aid insurgents.

I think if this threat ever existed it would have been deployed.


10 posted on 06/19/2007 11:25:06 AM PDT by berstbubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

He didn’t send them to Iran. In the 1991 engagement when Saddam invaded Kuwait and the elder Bush sent in the military, I remember reading that Saddam sent his up-to-date aircraft to be temporarily lodged in Iran. Afterwards, Iran refused to give the aircraft back to Saddam.


11 posted on 06/19/2007 11:36:03 AM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former MSM Viewer
If we could have only kept the support of the majority of Americans in this war

The American people aren't capable of supporting any war for more than a few months.
We don't do long protracted war well.
Unless our leaders learn that, and actually go into devastate mode we shouldn't even start.

12 posted on 06/19/2007 11:41:38 AM PDT by ASA Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble
If they are in Syria, why didn’t the Syrians use them against the Israelis or Lebanese Army during the hostilities in Beiruit last summer or smuggle some back into Iraq to aid insurgents.

I think if this threat ever existed it would have been deployed.

Likely reasons that it has not been deployed:
(1) Saddam and his forces no longer had access to the WMD material to deploy it;
(2) Those who have access/custody of the WMD would not benefit by using it and/or would face extreme retaliation if they chose to deploy it;
(3) Deploying the WMD would confirm that the material WAS there and WAS secreted out of Iraq during all the wrangling with the UN;
(4) Deploying the WMD would vindicate Bush and the US and refocus the War on Terrorism against the custodian nation/states (e.g. Syria);
(5) Deploying the WMD would validate the pre-emptive strike against Iraq by showing the danger they posed and would increase the perceived importance of dealing with Iran before it achieves true nuclear warfare capability (not to mention that it would probably result in massive airstrikes that would literally wipe Damascus off the map.)

The Syrians probably believe that once Bush is gone the US resolve to respond fiercely and decisively if they deploy the WMD will have waned.

13 posted on 06/19/2007 11:45:49 AM PDT by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble
The thing that no one has explained, however, is if Saddam had a WMD program and that program was then handed over to Syria, why didn’t Saddam ever use WMDs- except back during the Reagan administration.

Are you serious? Saddam used WMDs on the Kurds in his own country. It does not matter when he used them, Reagan administration or not. He had them. Unless you wish to deny that he killed the Kurds using chem weapons. I'm sure the Kurds have a different take on that.

Put a little thought into this. You don't need WMDs to overrun a small country like Kuwait so you don't use them there. You don't defend Kuwait with them either because the opponents are armed with much bigger, nastier stuff than what you have. And once you are thrown out of Kuwait, you only use them as a last ditch defence when you have nothing else to lose because the opponents are armed with much bigger, nastier stuff than what you have. And when the war is not hot, you don't use them anyway.

WMDs are a big escalator and despite the fact that he was a beast, Saddam was not nuts.

14 posted on 06/19/2007 11:48:52 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All

AUDIO TAPE of Gen Michael DeLong, deputy of general Tommy Franks, CENTCOM commander

“How the US army satellites saw trucks with Saddam’s WMDs driving to Syria”

http://www.eyeonbooks.com/ibp.php?ISBN=0895260204


A top Pentagon official who was responsible for tracking Saddam Hussein’s weapons programs before and after the 2003 liberation of Iraq, has provided the first-ever account of how Saddam Hussein “cleaned up” his weapons of mass destruction stockpiles to prevent the United States from discovering them.

“The short answer to the question of where the WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went was that they went to Syria and Lebanon,” former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John A. Shaw told an audience Saturday at a privately sponsored “Intelligence Summit” in Alexandria, Va. (www.intelligencesummit.org).

“They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units out of uniform, that were specifically sent to Iraq to move the weaponry and eradicate any evidence of its existence,” he said.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/2/18/233023.shtml?s=lh


15 posted on 06/19/2007 11:56:23 AM PDT by drzz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble

Ask Israelis. They received Scuds in 1991.

If Scud is no WMD, please let me know what really is.


16 posted on 06/19/2007 11:58:20 AM PDT by drzz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk
5 feet of rope around his neck and a 7 foot drop!

and the war was won!!!!

Maybe Reedi and Peeoso need a personal plunge of similar flavor to modify their opinions!

17 posted on 06/19/2007 11:58:25 AM PDT by Young Werther ( and Julius Ceasar said, "quae cum ita sunt." (or since these things are so!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble

If he had a program, why were none ever deployed to invade Kuwait, or to defend Kuwait once occupied, or to defend Iraq once they were driven from Kuwait, or why they were never used while we kept Saddam under our thumb during the 1990’s or during the invasion this time around. If they are in Syria, why didn’t the Syrians use them against the Israelis or Lebanese Army during the hostilities in Beiruit last summer or smuggle some back into Iraq to aid insurgents.

I think if this threat ever existed it would have been deployed.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This statement is light weight in logic. We told Saddam if he use WMD’s in Kuwait, we would turn Bagidad into shinny glass.

You need to read up on the backdoor communications that goes beyond the news the general sheep feeding level citizen sees.. IE MSM.


18 posted on 06/19/2007 12:15:32 PM PDT by CHICAGOFARMER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble

If he had a program, why were none ever deployed to invade Kuwait, or to defend Kuwait once occupied, or to defend Iraq once they were driven from Kuwait, or why they were never used while we kept Saddam under our thumb during the 1990’s or during the invasion this time around. If they are in Syria, why didn’t the Syrians use them against the Israelis or Lebanese Army during the hostilities in Beiruit last summer or smuggle some back into Iraq to aid insurgents.

I think if this threat ever existed it would have been deployed.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This statement is light weight in logic. We told Saddam if he use WMD’s in Kuwait, we would turn Bagidad into shinny glass.

You need to read up on the backdoor communications that goes beyond the news the general sheep feeding level citizen sees.. IE MSM.


19 posted on 06/19/2007 12:15:39 PM PDT by CHICAGOFARMER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CHICAGOFARMER

“You need to read up on the backdoor communications that goes beyond the news the general sheep feeding level citizen sees.. IE MSM.”
_____________

Ahhh, see I didn’t know that we had threatened to put Saddam on super secret probation. Now it all makes sense.


20 posted on 06/19/2007 12:21:32 PM PDT by berstbubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: drzz

Actually, no a SCUD does not qualify as a WMD. It is a missile of particularly poor quality. If you put a nuke or gas or biological warhead on it, then yes it certainly can deliver a WMD short range but on its own, a SCUD is not a WMD.


21 posted on 06/19/2007 12:23:27 PM PDT by berstbubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt

Your logic is a little bit twisted- one needs WMDs to put down a small Kurdish uprising, but not to invade a nation. You don’t use your most lethal weapons while you are taking a pounding from a larger opponent for fear of taking a pounding from a larger opponent.
Just doesn’t add up.


22 posted on 06/19/2007 12:25:31 PM PDT by berstbubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Given that there is so much evidence that Saddam’s illegal weapons, programs, documents, and equipment existed and were moved ........................

so iraq disarmed per UN agreement then, right?


23 posted on 06/19/2007 12:25:37 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (GOP Congress - 16,000 earmarks costing US $50 billion in 2006 - PAUL2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drzz

So if they were tracked by Satellite and Prediators, it is possible we know the final resting place of the WMDs in Syria?


24 posted on 06/19/2007 12:30:19 PM PDT by agincourt1415 (Fred Thompson in 08, start printing the Bumper Stickers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CHICAGOFARMER; 17th Miss Regt; drzz

The most likey scenario is that Saddam had little or no WMDs when the War began not because he had seen the light and just decided to be a nice guy, but because sanctions and inspectors and the loss of technology due to both as well as the first Gulf War had made it difficult if not impossible to maintain. Saddam played a huge bluff, trying to make others believe that he had WMDs to keep regional foes at bay as well as keep domestic opponents in fear. (Note the internal strife today, now that Saddam is not ruling with an iron fist).

I’m not saying that Saddam was a kitten, I’m saying that he was an impotent liar who used the threat of WMDs to sabre rattle. Problem is we called his bluff and kicked his ass as if he really had them.


25 posted on 06/19/2007 12:36:43 PM PDT by berstbubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble

- The thing that no one has explained, however, is if Saddam had a WMD program and that program was then handed over to Syria, why didn’t Saddam ever use WMDs- except back during the Reagan administration. -

First of all - it took Saddam all of about ten minutes to overrun Kuwait. He didn’t need them.

Second - He knew that if he used them on the US, the response would have been nuclear (at least with this President).

Third - The Syrians haven’t used them because they know that we know where they are and if any show up in the US, we’ll have a pretty good idea where they came from.

They are resting safely until Iran has a nuke ...


26 posted on 06/19/2007 12:39:30 PM PDT by NoBullZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

It’s been fairly obvious from the beginning of the iraq war that the WMDs were trucked to Syria, but I cannot understand why the administration hasn’t been pounding this fact into the MSM’s thick skulls for years.


27 posted on 06/19/2007 12:40:04 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble
You don’t use your most lethal weapons while you are taking a pounding from a larger opponent for fear of taking a pounding from a larger opponent. Just doesn’t add up.

So if you are aware that by escalating the situation through the use of chemical weapons, your opponent might escalate to the use of nuclear weapons in retaliation, you should ignore this consideration and just go ahead and use them? That is what your statement implies and that is preposterous.

You also seem to be saying that it is inconceivable that Saddam, possessing WMDs, would not use them in overrunning Kuwait. If you don't need to use such a weapon, you don't do so. You don't use a weapon simply because you have it.

28 posted on 06/19/2007 12:44:35 PM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

bump


29 posted on 06/19/2007 12:45:19 PM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (How do I change my screen name after Harper's election?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus

- It’s been fairly obvious from the beginning of the iraq war that the WMDs were trucked to Syria, but I cannot understand why the administration hasn’t been pounding this fact into the MSM’s thick skulls for years. -

Because that would demand a US response, and Bush doesn’t have the army to start a war with Syria (and by default, Iran)if it can be avoided. I have always thought, though I disagree with him on immigration, that he is most interested in doing what is right for the country as opposed to what will make him most popular. THAT is part of the reason he won’t budge on immigration - he truly believes its the right thing to do, IMHO. I just happen to disagree with him.


30 posted on 06/19/2007 12:45:43 PM PDT by NoBullZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt

“So if you are aware that by escalating the situation through the use of chemical weapons, your opponent might escalate to the use of nuclear weapons in retaliation, you should ignore this consideration and just go ahead and use them? That is what your statement implies and that is preposterous.”

You seem to imply that Sadaam was a rational person. He wasn’t.


31 posted on 06/19/2007 12:52:28 PM PDT by gracesdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Starman417
On June 9th [2004], the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission briefed the Security Council about the export of Iraqi WMD, missile and nuclear components shipped out of Iraq before, during and after the invasion. As reported by MENL news service, UNMOVIC acting executive chairman Demetrius Perricos told the Council, "The removal of these materials from Iraq raises concerns with regard to proliferation risks," and said inspectors found Iraqi WMD and missile components shipped abroad that still contained UN inspection tags.

The World Tribune reported on Perricos's briefing. "He said the Iraqi facilities were dismantled and sent both to Europe and around the Middle East at the rate of about 1,000 tons of metal a month... The Baghdad missile site contained a range of WMD and dual-use components, UN officials said. They included missile components, reactor vessel and fermenters ... required for the production of chemical and biological warheads. 'It raises the question of what happened to the dual-use equipment, where is it now and what is it being used for,' Perricos's spokesman, said. 'You can make all kinds of pharmaceutical and medicinal products with a fermenter. You can also use it to breed anthrax.'"

Source

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. James Clapper, head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, said vehicle traffic photographed by U.S. spy satellites indicated that material and documents related to the arms programs were shipped to Syria."

Source

"Last month Moshe Yaalon, who was Israel's top general at the time, said Iraq transported WMD to Syria six weeks before Operation Iraqi Freedom began.

Last March, John A. Shaw, a former U.S. deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said Russian Spetsnaz units moved WMD to Syria and Lebanon's Bekaa Valley.

"While in Iraq I received information from several sources naming the exact Russian units, what they took and where they took both WMD materials and conventional explosives," Mr. Shaw told NewsMax reporter Charles Smith.

Retired Marine Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong was deputy commander of Central Command during Operation Iraqi Freedom. In September 2004, he told WABC radio that "I do know for a fact that some of those weapons went into Syria, Lebanon and Iran."

In January 2004, David Kay, the first head of the Iraq Survey Group which conducted the search for Saddam's WMD, told a British newspaper there was evidence unspecified materials had been moved to Syria from Iraq shortly before the war.

"We know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD program," Mr. Kay told the Sunday Telegraph.

Also that month, Nizar Nayuf, a Syrian journalist who defected to an undisclosed European country, told a Dutch newspaper he knew of three sites where Iraq's WMD was being kept. They were the town of al Baida near the city of Hama in northern Syria; the Syrian air force base near the village of Tal Snan, and the city of Sjinsar on the border with Lebanon.

In an addendum to his final report last April, Charles Duelfer, who succeeded David Kay as head of the Iraq Survey Group, said he couldn't rule out a transfer of WMD from Iraq to Syria.

"There was evidence of a discussion of possible WMD collaboration initiated by a Syrian security officer, and ISG received information about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved. In the judgment of the working group, these reports were sufficiently credible to merit further investigation," Mr. Duelfer said."

Source

"The short answer to the question of where the WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went was that they went to Syria and Lebanon," former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John A. Shaw told an audience Saturday at a privately sponsored "Intelligence Summit" in Alexandria, Va. (www.intelligencesummit.org).

Source

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

Source

"Two days before the war, on March 17th, we saw through multiple intelligence channels - both human intelligence and techinical (satellite,eavesdrop) intelligence - large caravans of people and things, including some of the top 55 Iraqis, going to Syria."

Source

32 posted on 06/19/2007 12:58:59 PM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agincourt1415

It is possible that we saw what the Russians wanted us to see... The weapons may still be in Iraq and the fight we are encountering there may be a distraction to keep us from searching for them in a organized, thorough manner. Given what is known now about Speznatz contingency plans (open source info) for other places where the Soviets had WMD weapons stored it might be really interesting to search the bottom of the lakes (like lake Thar Thar) with some sonar devices and see if there is anything out of the ordinary there... just a thought


33 posted on 06/19/2007 1:00:46 PM PDT by RedEyeJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble
Saddam viewed himself as "Saladin" and when President Bush retires, he would had convinced the diplomats in the UN to drop the sanctions. Iraq would be able to rebuild their WMD program and become the strongest power in the Middle East and will cause problems with USA later on.

So President Bush did the right thing to take Saddam out. After 9/11, if any dictators continue to "talk big game", I'll take them out, no questions asked.

It's only that Rumsfeld and Bremer f***ed up the occupation by dismantling the Ba'athist Army and not sending enough American Troops to contribute to security.

Now we are getting paid for doing the "war on the cheap".

34 posted on 06/19/2007 1:02:50 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican (Everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: berstbubble
Saddam viewed himself as "Saladin" and when President Bush retires, he would had convinced the diplomats in the UN to drop the sanctions. Iraq would be able to rebuild their WMD program and become the strongest power in the Middle East and will cause problems with USA later on.

So President Bush did the right thing to take Saddam out. After 9/11, if any dictators continue to "talk big game", I'll take them out, no questions asked.

It's only that Rumsfeld and Bremer f***ed up the occupation by dismantling the Ba'athist Army and not sending enough American Troops to contribute to security.

Now we are getting paid for doing the "war on the cheap".

35 posted on 06/19/2007 1:03:24 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican (Everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: gracesdad
You seem to imply that Sadaam was a rational person. He wasn’t.

I can see how you might conclude that, but I think he was largely a pretty rational person. To get to the top in an Arab country requires a large ego and a lot of ruthlessness. Those characteristics may be inimical to making cool rational decisions, but they do not preclude them.

I think his unwillingness to disclose to the UN all he had was a product of his 'macho' culture - he could not back down and show weakness or a competitor might take over. Add to that a belief that the US would not really do anything after all the shouting was over, and you get a dictator that led his country into a war through misjudgement, not because he was irrational.

36 posted on 06/19/2007 1:04:00 PM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RedEyeJack

Very interesting assessment. Thanks.


37 posted on 06/19/2007 1:07:20 PM PDT by agincourt1415 (Fred Thompson in 08, start printing the Bumper Stickers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: agincourt1415

38 posted on 06/19/2007 1:37:10 PM PDT by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter; Young Werther

ping


39 posted on 06/19/2007 1:38:28 PM PDT by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: txflake

If I could read and speak Arabic, I would be in SIX FIGURES!


40 posted on 06/19/2007 1:41:30 PM PDT by agincourt1415 (Fred Thompson in 08, start printing the Bumper Stickers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: NoBullZone
“Second - He knew that if he used them on the US, the response would have been nuclear (at least with this President).”

I believe that was the protocol during the Bush I Admin.

41 posted on 06/19/2007 1:46:31 PM PDT by wolfcreek (AMNESTY: See what BROWN can do for you..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

The story is simply not true.

#1 - Chemical and biological weapons leave behind chemical signatures, much like radioactive materials leave behind a signature. That’s how we found the old stuff after the first war. No traces this time.

#2 - What military dictator GIVES UP weapons as a preparation for invasion? Using WMDs against American troops would have made him a god in the eyes of Islamic militants.

#3 - Why send them to Syria? Do people who push this theory really think he thought we’d invade, overthrow him, not find any weapons and put him back in power?

#4 - If it’s even remotely true, why isn’t Bush telling people or pressing Syria on the issue? Do the people who push this think he loves watching his legacy destroyed?

This utter conspiracy nuttery is becoming our “electronic vote stealing.”


42 posted on 06/19/2007 1:53:05 PM PDT by VirginiaConstitutionalist (Socialized medicine kills.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former MSM Viewer

Maybe Bush is protecting people who were involved with the UN OFF Scandal?

Look at Duelfer’s Report about Illicit Procurement.
Many countries are involved.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2004/isg-final-report/index.html

Maybe WMD went to Libya?

Why did the leader of Libya gave up his WMD program after Saddam was captured?

I was reading Qadhdhafi was terrified he was going to be next on the axis of evil but Qadhdhafi claims it was not our presence that made him give up his WMD.

He’s trying to save face.

Bush Administration are keeping quite for political leverage?


43 posted on 06/19/2007 7:27:48 PM PDT by Milligan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy

“...so iraq disarmed per UN agreement then, right?”

Reminds me of a meth lab getting wind of a police raid.

What do you do?

If you have enough time....move your illict ware to your friends house...the search warrant is only good for your house.

When the police come they have a empty house.
Now embarrass the police when you take them to court.


44 posted on 06/19/2007 7:34:16 PM PDT by Milligan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: VirginiaConstitutionalist

Well, how about this.
Saddam did not need large stockpiles.

“Just In Time” Break Out Capability.

“Iraq’s Real Weapons Threat” by Rolf Ekeus, June 29, 2003

Column by Former Head of UN Inspections Effort in Iraq

“the Iraqi policy after the Gulf War was to halt all production of warfare agents and to focus on design and engineering, with the purpose of activating production and shipping of warfare agents and munitions directly to the battlefield in the event of war. Many hundreds of chemical engineers and production and process engineers worked to develop nerve agents, especially VX, with the primary task being to stabilize the warfare agents in order to optimize a lasting lethal property. Such work could be blended into ordinary civilian production facilities and activities, e.g., for agricultural purposes, where batches of nerve agents could be produced during short interruptions of the production of ordinary chemicals.

This combination of researchers, engineers, know-how, precursors, batch production techniques and testing is what constituted Iraq’s chemical threat — its chemical weapon. The rather bizarre political focus on the search for rusting drums and pieces of munitions containing low-quality chemicals has tended to distort the important question of WMD in Iraq and exposed the American and British administrations to unjustified criticism.”

http://www.usembassy.it/file2003_07/alia/A3070202.htm

From 2005

http://www.asanltr.com/newsletter/05-5/articles/055b.html


45 posted on 06/19/2007 7:42:09 PM PDT by Milligan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Milligan

you bet


46 posted on 06/19/2007 8:44:16 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (GOP Congress - 16,000 earmarks costing US $50 billion in 2006 - PAUL2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk

Remember how Saddam moved his airplanes to his arch enemy Iran during the 1st Gulf War? He does have a history of moving what he doesn’t want us to get.


47 posted on 06/19/2007 9:11:54 PM PDT by Ooh-Ah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Starman417

Part III is on the Blog....with some interesting thoughts....


48 posted on 06/20/2007 1:33:15 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; drzz; Phatboy

ping


49 posted on 07/24/2007 1:25:39 PM PDT by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | 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