Posted on 03/21/2003 4:02:29 PM PST by Mr. Mulliner
US was 'dubious' from the start, says disappointed Blix
By Chris Bunting
21 March 2003
Hans Blix, the chief United Nations weapons inspector, said yesterday he was "disappointed" at the decision to go to war before his teams had completed their work.
Mr Blix told BBC Radio 4's Today that he was not sure Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and said UN inspectors had been getting more co-operation from the Iraqis before the US and Britain pulled the plug on their efforts. He did not believe the Security Council had intended the inspection process, initiated by resolution 1441 in November, to last less than four months.
Mr Blix, talking to reporters shortly before the first missiles struck Baghdad yesterday morning, said he was "curious" whether the Allies would find evidence of weapons of mass destruction after the war.
Intelligence given by the US to his team during their inspections had been largely discredited, he said. "We have never maintained or asserted that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, whether anthrax or nerve gas. What we have said is that their reporting on it demonstrated great lacunae in the accounting.
"But having something unaccounted for is not the same thing as saying it does exist ... If they don't have it, then it is very difficult for them to give the evidence. When the Americans go in, they will be able to ask people who will no longer be in fear and if the Iraqis have something, they will probably be led to it.
"I am very curious to see if they find something. The paradox is, if they don't find something, then you have sent in 250,000 men to wage war in order to find nothing."
Asked how he felt about having to withdraw his inspection teams, Mr Blix said: "It is clearly a disappointment. We began about three-and-a-half months ago and I think we made a very rapid start."
Mr Blix said he thought the US had been dubious from the beginning of the inspection process that it would lead to Iraqi disarmament.
"The resolution adopted last autumn was one that was extremely demanding and perhaps they doubted the Iraqis would go along with it," he said.
"But the Iraqis did co-operate with us and [the Americans] lost patience some time at the end of January or the beginning of February."
Again, not the issue. Did they obey Resolution 1441? That's the only issue.
The only flaw in your otherwise trenchant analysis. The Iraqis did not "cooperate with us," as Blix maintains. To Blix, and professional diplomats of his ilk, the process itself is what matters. The Iraqis were willing to maintain the appearance of cooperation, and the effort at that pretense was Blix's evidence that they took Blix--and the "process"--seriously.
Thus every "effort" becomes a self-fulfilling and self-justifying cause for more "process." This process can go on up until the day a hundred thousand Americans are murdered.
Even in that eventuality, Blix would see no difficulty, nor any need to apologize. After all, while the "process" was going on, Iraq would have been "contained." Up until that mythical last minute, where, to his "disappointment" the "process" finally broke down.
This is what allows state department process-apparatchiks from the Clinton administration to claim the Agreed Framework which transferred billions of dollars from several countries to North Korea in exchange for exactly nothing was a "success." And why they argue that we should go back and beg to give them billions more in exchange for even more nothing than before.
The reports were that the scuds were identified by their trajectory, which is different than the al-samouds.
Iraq-fired missile was likely banned by U.N.Kuwaiti officials said the first two were Scuds, similar to the ones the Iraqis fired in the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
The Pentagon described the two as "tactical ballistic missiles" -- which could include Scuds -- that were intercepted and destroyed by the PAC-3, the latest Patriot anti-missile system, as they flew toward Kuwaiti airspace at midday Thursday. The third missile also was intercepted and destroyed.
I guess it isn't conclusive that they were SCUDS, but it sure looks that way to me. Even if those first two "tactical ballistic missiles" weren't SCUDS, the third has been reported as an al-samoud (also prohibited).
Unfortunately, it will not be even an arguable point to Hans Blix or millions of fools all over the world who believe in the "legitimacy" of any band of gangsters who manage to sieze control of a frightened population.
The objection to US action, the subtext that frightens them all [including France] is the challenge implicit in the US claim that the Iraqis deserve to be liberated.
This is the fundamental failure of conservatism: a failure to challenge the left [or any opposition] on its basic assumptions. The Iraqi thugocracry asks, "who appointed Bush to run around the world, telling a President to leave his own country?" In response, we scramble around to justify our position on the basis of "International Law", which ultimately amounts to nothing more than questions about whether a self-appointed oligarchy that meets in New York City has its own debating points honored.
But our real response should be, "Who appointed Saddam Hussein ruler, judge, and executioner of his own people?"
My theory is that these folks (Blix, Clinton, etc) are mostly people who succeeded in school (did their homework, turned in papers, got A's), and thus decided that life was - or should be - just like school, writ large. It's all about obtaining papers with pleasing symbols on them: that's the same thing as "success". In fact that's the only standard of "success" they can understand. There's no place for reality or results in this equation. Clinton's NK deal, his "Oslo" process, those were "successes", and he's got the photographs of him signing parchments and holding other diplomats' hands to prove it! Those "successes" can now be safely added to his resume, in a bulleted list which also includes "Rhodes Scholar" and "President (1993-2001)".
The "process" fetish you refer to is understandably appealing in this light, because what is a "process" other than an endless, self-fulfilling opportunity to continually create and sign pleasing documents? It's like an extended, ongoing extra-credit assignment.
In a way it's all quite understandable. Someone with no success in real things but significant success in the artificial environment of school would naturally be attracted to the idea that life is just like school, or if it's not, it should be made to be like school, no matter how untrue or dangerous this idea actually is in reality.
This explains socialism (feudalism with intellectuals constituting the nobility) in general and, in particular, why Bush being "dumb" (having poor grammatical and linguistic skills) offends leftists so much. Life is a big academic competition, right? How can someone like Bush be crowned First In The Class? He doesn't study like Gore does!
All he does is lead with confidence and wisdom. How does one even measure that, let alone put it on their college application?
Doesn't he sound JUST like Tom Daschle? Eternally "disappointed" and "saddened"
And I would love to know his definition of "completed their work".
Never mind. I KNOW his definition.
In keeping with the ridiculousness of the proposition that Iraq must be allowed to continue to rape, torture, and murder other human beings in order to protect "International Law" [As if there could ever be a law which permitted, nay--required, lawlessness], I propose the following response:
If it turns out Saddam has no proscribed weapons, we will make every effort to dig him up and bring him back to life, so he can resume his legitimate authority.
KUWAIT CITY (Reuters) - A Kuwait defense official said coalition Patriot missiles had shot down an Iraqi Scud missile in northwestern Kuwait on Friday.
*Snicker*
Oh, and I should add, in the event this proves impossible to achieve, we shall be so very disappointed.
ROFL!!!!
Maybe the UN can ante up some gauze so the walking dead will be presentable.
According to Hans, if Iraq uses NBC against our troops he's say "See, he's cooperating, he's getting rid of his WMD's"
That was exactly the plan that was supposed to give us the excuse to go in, then Saddam feigned cooperation and muddied the water.. The French, Russians, Chia and others signed on to their deception.
This was all about a leadership change from the beginning and it was deserved even if Saddam didn't have WMD. He deserved it because he broke the deal that ended the Gulf War to begin with.
Had he abided by that agreement, then this whole mess would already be over and done with, there would be no sanctions and he would be busily & covertly rebuilding his military machine by now. Why he chose to play out this bad hand is beyond me. He should have capitulated when Clinton was in office, played up to X42's ego and he would have gotten off with a wrist slap..
Anything to give Clinton the title of "peacemaker" would have bought Saddam right out of that mess. Bet on it.
LMBO!
Why do I feel we are in for a bit of 'All depends on what the definition of is is'.
By the time leftists get done, a WMD will be only an item that kills more than 100,000 people, is successfully delivered by an elderly senior citizen who isn't an Arab, doesn't wear glasses, doesn't have any facial hair, is balding, and is wearing a t-shirt saying 'Nugent Rocks!'
Blix and Saddam are both June bugs on the windshield of life.
I agree with this generally. But it's an extremely limited academic experience, even at that. There is no real grounding in self-consistent abstraction like mathemetics or pure logic. Certainly no familiarity with empirical science.
This explains socialism (feudalism with intellectuals constituting the nobility) in general...
And living in a world with no empirical or even self-consistency requirements goes further along the line, because it allows the abstraction to be purely delusional, like socialism.
...and, in particular, why Bush being "dumb" (having poor grammatical and linguistic skills) offends leftists so much.
The earth is littered with the bodies, figuratively and literally, of those who think Bush is dumb. Personally, I love this "misunderestimation." The fastest route to defeat is the casual dismissal of your adversary.
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.