[backhoe]

Excuse the fast cut & paste, but it's time to nip this nonsense in the bud.

Be certain to follow the links within the links to get the full story.

[backhoe]

FYI--

[gov_bean_ counter]

There was more direct intel linking Saddam to WMD and the development of delivery systems than there ever was linking Al-Qaeda to a specific attack on the US, yet the Libs want to crucify this admin for acting on the former and not being able to prevent the latter.

For this they should pay.

[quidnunc]

I suspect that) Iraq had active and ongoing nuclear and bio/chem programs but had no large stocks of bio/chem weapons.

He wouldn't need large stores unless he was planning a war, which our air power over the two no-fly zones pretty much precluded.

I further suspect the Iraqis had a decentralized bio/chem manufacturing system which relied on dual-use industries which could be converted to produce bio/chems rapidly at need.

Such facilities would be difficult to locate and identify conclusively.

Finally, I suspect that we have been caught up short because we relied on information from Arabs — who are among the most conniving, treacherous people in the world.

We probably based too much of our intelligence on what the Iraqi opposition told us, and they would say or do anything they thought we would believe in order to get us to whack Saddam.

[Peach]

Thank you for all the links! I'd had a computer crash a few weeks ago and lost valuable links to this topic. Regards, Peach

[EternalHope]

Great work!

Bumped and bookmarked.

[FairOpinion]

It's terrific that you started this thread.

Let me add a few things, which contain statements of Democrats, including Daschle and Clinton showing that they are convinced Iraq has WMD:

"Plot do deceive" by Paul Kagan, containing quotes and facts:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/925015/posts

Daschle statement, Oct, 2002
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/924988/posts


Letter of Democrats urging Clinton to attack Iraq, because of WMD, 1998
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/924722/posts

Kerry's speech:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/924996/posts?page=30#30

Clinton speech in Feb. 1998:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/

Clinton speech in Dec. 1998, explaining strikes on Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html

[dixiechick2000]

Thank you so much, backhoe!

Bookmarked and bump!

[Richard Axtell]

Next time you hear some leftist say "... as yet no evidence of WMD has been found..." make them eat this list, and then have them recite these words..."I don't know what the f**k I am talking about, I don't know..." etc, etc.

[jammer]

Here's the problem, backhoe, it seems to me. I went to the first link, desperate to find hard evidence to convince my skeptical friends. What did I find? A story about trailers that the CIA is convinced have only the purpose of WMD. I scroll down to another in Insight. It talks about unnamed defectors, but there is no hard evidence.

Now, that is enough to buttress the convictions of true believers, but it isn't good enough to sway undecided people. Forget the "hate Bush, no matter what" people. There are reasonable, reasonably informed people who say, "where's the beef?" If these articles are the beef, then I am scared to death: the a??holes on the left must be right. I won't go through more. You have a certain amount of our attention. Whittle them down, please, to hard evidence and not inference or unnamed "defectors."

[baseballmom]

Thank you for all your hard work, backhoe.

Bookmarked and bumped.

[AntiGuv]

About half these articles you've revived have already been dismissed as inaccurate; most of the remainder are regurgitation of the same intelligence that's currently under fire. Don't you think that if all your links had substance, then we wouldn't even be having this debate?

[Lady In Blue]

Thanks for the links. You know one of the things that really irritates me is that the leftists and the UN and all of the anti-war crowd were willing to give the inspectors all the time they wanted, and without having to fight a war! The U.S. and it's allies have had to fight a war, stabilize a country,feed the people, guard the oil wells and restore electricity AND SEARCH FOR WMDS! And all in only 6 weeks!

[ChadGore]

Statement by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle on a Resolution Authorizing the President to Use Force, if Necessary, to End the Threat to World Peace from Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Thursday, October 10, 2002

---

"Saddam Hussein has stockpiled, weaponized, and used chemical and biological weapons. And he has made no secret of his desire to acquire nuclear weapons. He has ignored international agreements and frustrated the efforts of international inspectors, and his ambitions today are as unrelenting as they have ever been."

"As a condition of the truce that ended the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein agreed to eliminate Iraq’s nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, and to abandon all efforts to develop or deliver such weapons. That agreement is spelled out in UN Security Council Resolution 687. Iraq has never complied with the resolution. For the first seven years after the Gulf War, it tried to deceive UN weapons inspectors, block their access to key sites and make it impossible for them to do their jobs. Finally, in October 1998, the UN was left with no choice but to withdraw its inspectors from Iraq. As a result, we do not know exactly what is now in Iraq’s arsenal."

"We do know, however, that Iraq has weaponized thousands of gallons of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. We know that Iraq maintains stockpiles of some of world’s deadliest chemical weapons, including VX, sarin and mustard gas. We know that Iraq is developing deadlier ways to deliver these horrible weapons, including unmanned drones and long-range ballistic missiles. And we know that Saddam Hussein is committed to one day possessing nuclear weapons. If that should happen, instead of simply bullying the Gulf region, he could dominate it. Instead of threatening only his neighbors, he would become a grave threat to US security and to global security. The threat posed by Saddam Hussein may not be imminent. But it is real. It is growing. And it cannot be ignored. ..."

"Second: We need to make it clear to the world that the reason we would use force in Iraq is to remove Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. I would prefer that this goal had been made explicit in this resolution. However, it is clear from this debate that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction are the principal threat to the United States -- and the only threat that would justify the use of United States military force against Iraq. It is the threat that the President cited repeatedly in his speech to the American people Monday night. It may also be the only threat that can rally the world to support our efforts. Therefore, we expect, and success demands, that the Administration not lose sight of this essential mission."

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Many many links here!

Bush Doctrine Unfolds :

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Bush Doctrine Unfold , click below:
	click here >>>	Bush Doctrine Unfold	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[FairOpinion]

Adding to the list, Mark Steyn's excellent editorial on the subject:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/925094/posts?page=10

It would obviously be easier to wait and pick the evidence of WMD out of the rubble of Birmingham, but for the Americans it is capability that's the determining criterion.

[EODGUY]

Bump, bookmarked and sincere thanks to you!

EODGUY

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for this great job.

Can anyone get this to the conservative web bloggers?

[backhoe]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/925368/posts
Powell Slams Media On Iraq WMD Reports
CNN ^ | June 8, 2003 | CNN

[FairOpinion]

One more very informative article for the collection:

Iraq's bioweapons program: detailed info on mobile labs from pre-war intel.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/925421/posts?page=1

[backhoe]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/925335/posts
Iraq Had Secret Labs, Officer Says
Los Angeles Times ^ | June 8, 2003 | Bob Drogin