| Anti-War Crowd Demands Proof of WMD's
|
Posted on 04/28/2003 7:16:34 PM PDT by Chirodoc
Despite the insistence of the Pentagon that a menacing arsenal of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) eventually will be found in Iraq, the failure after more than a month of war and occupation to unearth even a single illegal warhead or a drum of prohibited chemicals is causing alarm in political circles here. Already British Prime Minister Tony Blair is coming under mounting pressure in the House of Commons to agree to setting up a formal British parliamentary inquiry into Saddam Hussein's WMD programs and the claims made about them before the war by the intelligence services.
Prior to the war both U.S. and British intelligence were behind a series of claims involving, as it emerged, some faked documents. The British insisted that Iraq, for example, had obtained "significant quantities of uranium from Africa" and identified the source as Niger. George W. Bush highlighted the allegation in a speech, but the International Atomic Energy Agency later determined the documents on which the claim was based had been forged - a conclusion that left Downing Street red-faced and on the defensive in the House of Commons.
Some British government members remain uneasy; so too do Conservative leaders who were supportive of the prime minister in the run-up to the war and during the fighting. They have warned Downing Street that there could be major political consequences if nothing large is found and that Blair then will be faced with claims that he - and the Bush administration - exaggerated the danger and set out to deceive the world.
A hue-and-cry about the absence so far of WMDs already is under way in the press here with The Independent on Sunday, among other influential publications, demanding, "So where are they, Mr. Blair?"
Such blunt questioning hasn't surfaced yet in the United States. The U.S. media, which many Europeans think hasn't been skeptical enough throughout the crisis, has concentrated more on stories about the rebuilding of Iraq and the growing anti-Americanism being exhibited by Iraqi Shiites. American media appear more ready on the whole to trust Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's assurances that a massive WMD program will be uncovered in time. Most seemed unfazed by Rumsfeld's comment that it may take up to a year to find the warheads and the tons of chemical and biological toxins he insists Saddam had hidden.
That remark earned scorn in the United Kingdom, with some politicians and journalists questioning the argument that Saddam's regime could have been that cunning in concealing the weapons. They maintain the shambolic nature of the regime, as revealed by the manner and speed of its collapse, suggests that Baghdad wasn't capable of hiding WMD programs.
Furthermore, there are few here who believe the claims being made by some in the Bush administration that Saddam was able to ship the weapons to Syria. Independent military experts say it is highly unlikely that Saddam would have decided to disarm himself at a time when the regime's survival was on the line.
There even are a few in the Bush administration losing confidence in their prewar belief that U.S. intelligence agencies and the Pentagon had a strong line on the whereabouts of WMDs. Not that they are saying Saddam wasn't attempting to develop such programs. Their point - and they include senior officials at the State Department - is that the U.N. weapons-inspection regime and economic sanctions on Iraq made it far more difficult for Saddam to fulfill his ambitions.
No doubt the effort to discover what Saddam was up to has been made harder by regime loyalists stealing and burning files, electronic data and equipment from the nonconventional arms programs, all under the cover of the recent widespread looting. Belatedly, U.S. Central Command has begun to expand security around a wider range of facilities in a bid to secure evidence that Pentagon officials maintain is melting away.
Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defense for policy, claimed recently that some of the "looting is actually strategic," especially when it comes to government ministries. Feith insists that evidence will emerge eventually and that critics should be patient. "There's a common assumption that if you know they have chemical or biological weapons, then your intelligence should be good enough to know where they are," he remarked recently.
Pentagon officials say the 50 WMD-related facilities now being protected by U.S. forces represent just a tiny fraction of the many thousands of government and Ba'ath Party offices, state enterprises, prisons, barracks and private homes where Saddam may have hidden evidence of nonconventional arms.
That may be so, but the absence of evidence so far contrasts jarringly with the certainty being expressed before the war by the Bush and Blair teams about their knowledge of Saddam's WMD programs. In the weeks to come pressure likely will grow on the White House and Downing Street to make good on all of that prewar certainty. If they can't, either because what Saddam had was exaggerated by Washington and London or because of a brilliant concealment effort by Baghdad, critics of the war will at last have some hefty ammunition to fire.
After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
Maybe if Clinton had kept his promise, an estimated 3,000 people in New York and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today.
And, now that Bush is taking action to bring these people to justice, we have opponents charging him with being a war monger...and if he doesn't produce OBL and Saddam well he BROKE his promise and the LIBERALS will crucify him at election time. All the while forgeting Slick Willie and Hitlery promised justice and didn't deliver it.
| Anti-War Crowd Demands Proof of WMD's
|
Nope, we'd better find WMDs or we will look like asses.
I would argue that clinton's mouthing without doing is what further encouraged bin Laden to plan and carry out his plot, sure that America would do as clinton had been doing ... nothing. When Bush senior left office, Iraq tried to kill him in Kuwait. sinkEmperor can rest assured that no terrorist will try to kill him because he caused them no harm whatsoever, endangered them not one iota, but he talked like he would. He was diagnosed as a pussy by bin Laden and then he proved it by doing nothing to make binny angry. Even when Mansoor Ijaz worked out a capture with the Sudanese government, sinkwillie was too busy diddling interns and anything else with lips to take Laden into American custody.
Sadly, it isn't the deviant ex-president who will reap the whirlwind he has sown, it is the American people, our children and homes and places of work. Sadder still, there is a too large constituency of the democrat party that will never be able to make the connection for why democrats cannot be trusted to defend this nation, because they are blinded with bitterness that Goreghoul wasn't successful manipulating the Supreme Courts of Flordia and the U.S. to take the Whitehouse.
My post was in response to your statement that our primary motive in the invasion was terrorist funding by Iraq. I'm saying that's not true.
We admit we were wrong and sorry about the whole thing :(
Oh yeah, don't forget to put those children back in prison before you leave and clean up these high voltage electric cables for shocking innocent people.
Throw those people back down the dank and filthy holes they were stuffed in for years and years.
Almost forgot to put the professional rapists back on the payroll, make sure you gave them back pay for their loss of pleasure and income.
That's funny...even the UN claimed there were tons of chemical and biological WMDs that were unaccounted for.
And it doesn't make sense that Saddam was willing to lose billions in oil revenues over sanctions..when he could have easily complied with UN demands instead of fighting them.
Liberals are like children...until the war was won..it was a quagmire and Vietnam...and until the hidden WMDs are found, Bush will be a liar according to them.
Don't forget the terrorist training camps. We have to get both of those back up and running.
Also, I think there was one...no two suicide bombings since Saddam fell. So, we owe the Palestinians $50,000.
Last, turn Syria's illegal oil supply back on.
Oh..as we leave, collect all those religious banners and protest signs the Shias, Shi'ites have been using. They wont need those anymore.
I remember well, what the arguments were for going to the UN, for chastising Germany, France, China, and Russia for not backing us. It is imperative we find WMD's to clear our name and reputation. If not, we wind up with egg on our faces, and the conservatives expose themselves to the public as being just as big a liars as the liberals. This is serious business, if you respect the long-term trend for conservatism.
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.
The phrase "Be careful what you wish for" comes to mind :)