Kay on Today: "It Was Absolutely Prudent to Go to War Against Saddam" (Remarkable New Info)

The Today Show

[demlosers]

"If you didn't find WMDs, does that mean they never existed, or could they have been moved prior to war?"

Come on....Iraq is the size of Californina. IMHO, it's still too soon to make a conclusive decision.

Yeah, what Saddam had left could be hidden in a few tractor trailer loads. There's a lot of sand in Iraq to hide in. Some in-the-know Saddamite has to come forward and give it up - totally doubtful.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

bump for later bookmarking

[sweetliberty]

"All I know is that the RATS are lying and will continue to do so."

.

"Would I lie to you?"

[billbears]

Yours is a purely political argument. Most Americans are more interested in the national security aspect of this war.

????? If there were no weapons there, there isn't really a national security risk now is there? So your argument of national security sort of falls flat on its face

BTW, where do you think WMD come from, if not WMD programs?

Do I know? Do I care? If he wasn't producing them, which Kay now admits, they could have come from previous production or nations friendly to Iraq at a time before the Gulf War. Now I'm not sure we want to start delving into that now do we?

[NonValueAdded]

Glenn Beck is all over this today and doing a darn good job of analysis. I'd say this is the best I've ever heard him! Does anyone subscribe to his insider service? It would be nice to get some of what he's saying "on the record," our record. Also, let Glenn know today's show is a keeper for his "best of" archives.

[MHGinTN]

I would agree with your notion that the weapons materials are more likely in Syria. But as to the 'size of California' notion, it is not so difficult to 'satellite' follow raodways that could have hidden sites along them for easy access to the weapons caches. The notion of comparing Iraq to California in size is limited in usefulness tot he accessibility factors ... weapons aren't hidden in too isolated locations such that it is difficult to retrieve them! Sidescan radar is a useful tool for locating buried things, if one has a thoughtful search pattern, if you get my drift. One doesn't bother with 'middle of the desert' where no roads access the site, but one does search out farming properties and desert locations with road accessibility.

[alnick]

????? If there were no weapons there, there isn't really a national security risk now is there? So your argument of national security sort of falls flat on its face BTW, where do you think WMD come from, if not WMD programs? Do I know? Do I care? If he wasn't producing them, which Kay now admits, they could have come from previous production or nations friendly to Iraq at a time before the Gulf War. Now I'm not sure we want to start delving into that now do we?

Actually, Kay does NOT admit that Saddam was not producing weapons of mass destruction. Remember those sacks of mislabeled castor beans? I'm sure you do since you insisted that they were harmless.

Kay said that Iraq was working on producing ricin RIGHT UP UNTIL THE END.

And for you to pretend that you aren't aware that WMD programs lead to WMD is -- well, no one is that foolish.

[alnick]

If there were no weapons there, there isn't really a national security risk now is there?

Oh, and yes, there was, according to Kay -- even more of a risk than we thought before going in.

Given your posting history, I'm sure you'll conveniently ignore what Kay actually said and stick to repeating selective soundbites taken out of context.

[alnick]

If there were no weapons there, there isn't really a national security risk now is there?

Oh, and yes, there was, according to Kay -- even more of a risk than we thought before going in.

Given your posting history, I'm sure you'll conveniently ignore what Kay actually said and stick to repeating selective soundbites taken out of context.

[ZULU]

Go to http://www.billoreilly.com.

He's running a poll on whether Bush should admit there were no weapons of mass destruction. This poll should be freeped and O'Reilly was wrong last night in his analysis.

Saddam was working on WMD. That's a given. We DON'T know how far he got or where if anywhere, anything he may have produced went. THAT'S STILL an open question.

THAT in itself was enough to invade Iraq, especially considering his blatant violation of the armistice agreement at the end of Persian Gulf War I. He violated his agreement with the U.N. and fired on American and allied surveillance aricraft.

Also, a book is being released soon, authored by reporter Jana Davis in which she lays out a strong case for Iraqi involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing. It would hardly surprise me if Saddam wasn't involved in some way with the World Trade attack. He might not be a Wahhabi, but a common enemy makes friends of the oddest bedfellows.

Iraq was a good target to pick in the Islamofascist world because it was ruled by a brutal hated dictator who was actively conspiring against us.

From a geographic perspective, it was also a good target. If we can install a pro-western Democratic government there, it is situated right between three other rogue anti-western terrorist havens - Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. It has great strategic value and can and should be used to destablize even further the regime of the Ayatollahs in Iran, shake down the Syrians and intimidate the Saudis.

Finally, Iraq was a lynchpin between Lbyia, Syria, and possibly Saudian radicals and nuclear weapons providers in Pakistan and North Korea. Libya already crapped out of conspiring - or at least so they currenly plead. Thoughts of another night attack by American aircraft probably gave Khadaffi the willies.

Bush was right in selecting Iraq. We were right in attacking it, and the only reasonable criticisms, if any, can be levelled at the post-war occupation and the way we are now proceeding to democratize that country. But it took us from the early 1600's to the late 1700's to formulate our own Republic, so we shouldn't expect people who are even more politically atavistic than 17th and 18th century Americans to take a lot of time to get into the 20th century.

[Alamo-Girl]

Bump!

[aruanan]

Kay: "It was absolutely prudent to go to war. The system was collapsing, Iraq was a country with desire to develop WMDs, and it was attracting terrorists like flies to honey."

Or, more accurately, "...it was attracting terrorists like flies to a big wet turd."

[billbears]

And given your posting history I'm sure you'll conveniently ignore factual evidence and listen to soundbites from the administration and whoever tells you what you want to hear no matter what the facts point to.

[billbears]

What happened to the stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons that everyone expected to be there?

I don't think they existed.

I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and those were a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them. I think the best evidence is that they did not resume large-scale production, and that's what we're really talking about, is large stockpiles, not the small. Large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the period after '95.

Interview with David Kay

[LayoutGuru2]

More MIG pics can be found here (Buried_Iraqi_MIG.pps, PowerPoint file).

[YaYa123]

Don't give up your day job. Stay skeptic par excellance!

"thoroughly fair" ? Lauer was thoroughly fair only because Kay left no room for subtle innuendo. It was as if Kay came out swinging today because his first interview was so politically twisted by hopeful democrats and media.

I watched another great (and surprising) voice last night in protecting Bush from Democrat crazed blame. You're not going to believe it. The very liberal republican Peter King was soooooo articulate and specific in defending the motives of the administration, and he had to fight both the lefty that was on, and Scarborough, who kept interrupting him. But King was determined, and he finished his thoughts. (Scarborough is such an amateur at this.)

I missed TODAY this morning, but MSNBC has been replaying snippets all day long. The record is now clear, Kay has made it so. But.... Let's not hold our collective breaths waiting for the media to challenge democrats who are deceptively calling for Bush's head on a platter.

Oh and another bonus from this afternoon: President Bush and the head of Polish government took questions today in the White House. The guy told reporters Hans Blix had visited with him before the war and told him there was no doubt Saddam had WMD or the capability of getting them. (Love bitchslapping Blix!)

[Aggie1]

Most seem to miss the point (rather the FACT). That without a doubt, NOT ONE SHREAD OF DOUBT, Iraq had WMD's!
Remember 20,000 Kurds were gassed with WMD's!! Now with that said, can we verify the WMD's were destroyed and the capability and aparatus to make more dismantled? NO! That should be topic number one for the weapons inspectors.

Kay should have made that point. They knew they had them at one point and couldn't verify they were destroyed. EVERY credible intelligence agency in the world thought he still had them. Therefore, you MUST assume they still exist. To do otherwise risks unthinkable calamity.

Of course we all know that if Bush hadn't acted they would be accusing him of not having the courage to do what was needed in disarming Iraq. I can just hear it now..."We need a real leader that can face up to Saddam, I am that person. Not afraid to ...blah, blah, blah."

[YaYa123]

"George Tenet has ALWAYS been Bush's Weakest Link!!!"

And he's a Clinton hold-over, which rattles my chain that Bush is still defending him, but he surely did today when taking questions with the Polish president. President Bush congratulated Kay, the work of the team, and he had praise for Tenet and the intelligence community.

Loyalty is a good thing, but there's no doubt in my mind, Tenet's version wouldn't be a two way street. Maybe Bush's loyalty to Tenet goes back to Dad's CIA. Oh don't get me wrong, I think the intelligence on WMDs came from everywhere, including the UN, and Tenet doesn't deserve to be tarred and feathered, but maybe he does need to just move on. He's not helping Bush at this point.

[Go Gordon]

Only one explanation, Lauer has been cloned by aliens.

The real explanation: The Clintons et al put out the word that Bush better win in 04' so Hitlery can coast in 08'. Having a RAT win the presidency in 04' precludes Hillary from running in 08' In 2012, she'll be even more butt ugly than she is now.

[TexKat]

Thanks Mo1 for the ping.

washington post.com

Text of Reuters Interview with David Kay

Friday, January 23, 2004; 5:13 PM

The following are excerpts of a telephone interview conducted with David Kay, after he stepped down Friday as the chief U.S. arms hunter in Iraq:

Q: Why did you decide to step down?

A: "It was, as usually it is in these cases, a complex set of issues, it related in part to a reduction in the resource and a change in focus of ISG (Iraq Survey Group). When I had started out, I had made it a condition that ISG be exclusively focused on WMD. That's no longer so. The reduction of resources. And the reason those were important is, and at least to me they were important, is I didn't feel that we could complete the task as quickly as I thought it important to complete the task, unless we exclusively focused ISG.

Q. You're talking about that they were asking some of the analysts to do the insurgency work, right?

A. Yes.

Q: Is it true that one of the reasons you wanted to step down was because you don't believe that anything will be found, is that true?

A: "No. No, that wasn't the reason. In fact, the reason I thought it important to complete everything is that ... by the time we get to June ... we're not going to find much after June. Once the Iraqis take complete control of the government it is just almost impossible to operate in the way that we operate. In fact it was already becoming tough. We had an important ministry that would not allow its people to be interviewed unless they had someone present. It was like the old regime.

"I think we have found probably 85 percent of what we're going to find.

"The country is such and he hid so much that you can probably spend the next decade of your life in the country, and you will find things, but I think in terms of understanding that program, we're well on the way, almost at the end, so that you can say what went wrong, what they had."

Q: What happened to the stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons that everyone expected to be there?

A: "I don't think they existed.

"I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and those were a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them. I think the best evidence is that they did not resume large-scale production, and that's what we're really talking about, is large stockpiles, not the small. Large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the period after '95."

Q. After '95?

A. "We're really talking about from the mid-90s, when people thought they had resumed production."

Q. What about the nuclear program?

A. "The nuclear program was as we said in the interim report, I think that will be a final conclusion. There had been some restart of activities, but they were rudimentary.

"It really wasn't dormant because there were a few little things going on, but it had not resumed in anything meaningful."

Q: You came away from the hunt that you have done believing that they did not have any large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the country?

A: "That is correct."

Q. Is that from the interviews and documentation?

A. "Well the interviews, the documentation, and the physical evidence of looking at, as hard as it was because they were dealing with looted sites, but you just could not find any physical evidence that supported a larger program."

Q: Do you think they destroyed it?

A: "No, I don't think they existed."

Q. Even though in the mid-1980s people said they used it on Halabja?

A. "They had stockpiles, they fought the Iranians with it, and they certainly did use it on the Kurds. But what everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last (1991) Gulf War and I don't think there was a large-scale production program in the '90s."

Q: What are you going to do now?

A: "I'm going back to the private sector. I know that. But I haven't done anything. I said I wouldn't do that until I left."