Bush: 'We Found' Banned Weapons

Washington Post ^ | 5/31/03

[areafiftyone]

KRAKOW, Poland, May 30 -- President Bush, citing two trailers that U.S. intelligence agencies have said were probably used as mobile biological weapons labs, said U.S. forces in Iraq have "found the weapons of mass destruction" that were the United States' primary justification for going to war.

In remarks to Polish television at a time of mounting criticism at home and abroad that the more than two-month-old weapons hunt is turning up nothing, Bush said that claims of failure were "wrong." The remarks were released today.

"You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, 'Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons,' " Bush said in an interview shortly before leaving on a seven-day trip to Europe and the Middle East. "They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two.

[chudogg]

But what in the heck business did we have selling missles to Iran?????

Because Iraq started winning the war.

[cardinal4]

I worded that wrong, sorry. what I meant to say was of all the scandals that have plagued Presidents, Iran- Contra was at least altruistic. Yeah, I know, the road to hell and all that...but dems were able to get people fired over it. It was because of the dems hatred of Reagans vision of America that drove him to do it.(Blocking US funds to the Contras, which was purely partisan, unless Mitchell and the rest of the dems didnt care about the spread of communism in the Americas).
Dont blame Reagan for Iran Contra, like Casey, he believed........

[Paraclete]

Yes, forgive me for doubting. All the reports since the war ended that have not turned out positive about WMD. Yes, we have the mobile labs. That is something, but far below the whole story. As much as I'd like to believe our government is perfect and totally competetent, I'm too old to be so naieve. Something is amiss here or Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and nearly every commander in the field I've read about wouldn't be lowering expectations or outright saying they haven't found anything.

Am I sorry we took out Saddam and hold Iraq -- heck no!

I just like the truth. From beginning to end. We're big boys and girls. We can take it.

[Mike Darancette]

Advanced Unit (Islam is Love)

[B Knotts]

That looks like a 1988 model, which was based on a Chevrolet van chassis, and was powered by a V-6.

Yes, I looked it up.

[gdc61]

Dennis Miller was on fox the other night and said he thought anyone who said Saddam didn't have chemical weapons should have to drink a glass of water from the Tigris...funny guy, but its no joke. Its the truth. I think everyone(media)forgot about that. the Tigris is a large river, millions of gallons of water and it tested positive for several WMD type chemicals. (where's the ELF when you ned them)coughcough

[Reagan Man]

So far, US forces have examined about one-third of all the sites in Iraq that are known to have been connected to the production of weapons of mass destruction. The US is sending over additional investigators to assist an overburdened workforce. I think a little more time is in order, before anyone should jump to conclusions.

And the fact is there has been significant evidence already found that ties Saddam's regime to WMD's. Things like mobile bio labs, radioactive drums, poisonous chemicals turning up in the Euphrates, mustard gas canisters, atropine kits, protective suits, precursor materials, hollow warheads and several types of illegal missiles.

[FRgal4u]

This is pure spin..we need to find the wmd - at least whatever left of it...

this wmd issue is troubling..did the cia, pentagon try to drum up the seriousness of the wmd to get us involve in iraq..they have a lot of questions need to answer..the real threat here is if next time there is some real wmd threat, no one, not even republicans will listen to these claims..

did the pentagon play a role in hyping the wmd cases here? how about the cia? where is the like of kristol? Rummy, Wolfowitz trying to talk the wmd issue down and backfired...right at the moment when gwb has to face the g8 leaders..tony blair put his career in trusting the wmd claims and all these talks from rummy/wolfowitz are not helping..why can't these people just stfu...if gwb was being lied to by the likes of chalabi, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, he better clean house fast or his 2004 re-election will be in trouble. all those funny stories from the pentagon - bunkers in dora farm, jesse lynch, second saddam strikes - what is going on here...the foot soldiers did a magnificant job, but i have serious doubt on what the intentions of rummy, wolfowitz are...and they are talking about regime chg in iran - NO FRIGGIN WAY if gwb wanna have second term..

[MJY1288]

The real deal that's going on right now is INTERNATIONAL POLITICS. Jordan, Syria, France, Germany, Russia, and Libya all have their hands dirty in Iraq's WMD programs and we are holding all the cards right now. There is no reason for this administration to show it's hand until the time is right.

Anybody who is so sure that Iraq didn't have these WMD's and that Bush and Blair wanted war for some sinister reason should show us all how sure they are about this conspiracy theory, by bathing in the Tigris river. They should also stroll through those areas where our radiation detectors went off the scale, as well as explain why so many Iraqi scientist have been working in Lybia over the past few years

[RJayneJ]

I completely agree with your comments. I don't think the leader of any country is going to be candid about all the steps they take when trying to protect their citizens. If I play a little mind game and try to figure out what I would want to do if I was in charge of fighting a handful of countries that were producing religious fanatic that lived to kill Americans, I would want to have a toe hold in the region. It only takes a few minutes to get there, so I think President Bush does not intend to leave Iraq for a while. Yes, he will have to bring the country and the world along, but he will.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

A little history:

PROOF of Iraq's WMD (Flashback Clinton speech 1998)

[snickeroon]

Totally agree! The President is amazingly consistent in his tendency to say little and know much.

It occurs that the mobile labs alone are two more "smoking" guns found in a matter of months....compared to the Uhhh Unnnhs finds over a period of YEARS. The libs MUST be held to CONSTANT accountability for saying ANYTHING deragatory of the administration at this time. WHY? All we heard for the last year was: "The UN NEEDS more time....these weapons are hard to find, so we MUST allow them more time....blah, blah, blah...

Now over a matter of a few months the fact there is derision because a mountain of wmds have not appeared is TRULY ludicrous.

Nope. The President is extremely controlled, quiet, relaxed, and at ease on this topic. Just like the cat with the cream. Time WILL tell.

[MJY1288]

The big difference between what Clinton said in 1998 and what President Bush said on Sept. 12th, 2002 is George W. Bush wasn't selling wolf tickets

[MJY1288]

I'm sure GWB is probably getting a kick out of the snot slinging hissy fit the left is in right now. For the last 30 months the Liberals have had to clean more egg off their face than all the eggs Denny's could hope to sell to their customers. This deal in Iraq has been the same way, from the "Quagmire" claims to the "Looting" of Iraqi museums. The leftist liberals have been grasping at straws and comeing away with egg on their faces

[Sparta]

Wrong. The fact is Bush and Blair always claimed several reasons for going after Saddam...which included WMDs, the danger of Saddam's assisting terrorists, and liberating the Iraqi people from the oppression of his regime.

The only reason that matters for American national security is Saddam assisting terrorists (which I believe he did on three attacks on American soil). With all due respect to Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz, the other two reasons are irrelevant.

If we were going after WMDs, my question is when do we go after Syria, Libya, India, Pakistan, China, North Korea, Russia and the other nations with WMDs. Also, why should we enforce UN resolutions?

As for Saddam murdering his own people, again, when we do attack the other human rights abusers of the world.

Bush or Wolfowitz have nothing to explain to me. I believe this war was necessary for America's national security. Liberating the Iraqi people and stopping Iraq's WMD program and impending destruction of OPEC are just a little fringe benefit.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

I guess we can assume that the Democrat platform in 04, will be for the reinstallation of Saddam Hussein as the leader of Iraq . The left really misses that monstrous mass murderer,but, then again, they never were very good judges of character. I wouldn't be surprised to see some Dems start a "draft Saddam" movement for the VP slot.

[Ronin]

a bump for YOUR reply.

Thank you.

[El Gato]

If you're referring to support for the contra's that's one thing. But what in the heck business did we have selling missles to Iran?????

We didn't sell missles to Iran, well not after the fall of the Shah. What we did sell to them was parts for missles they already had. Hawks, IIRC. They were being attached by, guess who?.........Yes, Saddam at the time. The missles couldn't even be used to attack Saddam or Iraq, only to defend against Iraqi air raids. The trade was to get some of our folks out of Lebanon. So the trade was, a few more dead Baathist pilots and/or crashed French or Soviet built Iraqi aircraft for freedom for some Americans. Doesn't sound like a bad deal to me.

[El Gato]

Yep, we've looked at 200 of 900 suspect sites, 22.2% of them and who knows what percent of all sites. We haven't found sufficient evidence to convince those who don't want to be convinced, and so therefore we won't ever find any more evidence or actual WMDs. Maybe, but more likely NOT!

[MJY1288]

Why not! Saddam has probably donated to well over half of their election campaigns in the past