If Saddam Had Stayed

[DC]

Not in Leftyworld. In Leftyworld, there wouldn't be any ridiculous "ceasefire agreement". Because there wouldn't have been any liberation of Kuwait in Leftyworld. Political Darwinism. Kuwait's luck just ran out. That's the way you have to look at it.

Because everyone minds their own business in Leftyworld. Leftist wonks, paid by George Soros, decide what everyone's business is, and everyone else follows along.

No, the president and the congress have no say in the matter. Especially if it's a foreign matter. All countries are to stay out of other countries' business. Except Israel. All countries are to mind Israel's business. In fact, that is the only legitimate function of the UN. To closely monitor and pass resolutions against Israel.

Well, actually, that's not exactly the way it works. It's complicated. If Cuba was being whacked, the leftists would be screeching like banshees, demanding international intervention. Or a country like Iraq. They screeched about that, didn't they. I suppose it comes down to opposition to the US. Any country opposed to the US is inviolate, and everyone is to stay out of their business. But Russia and China can meddle, undermine, and kick all the others around.

Yes, I know it's complicated. Just don't worry about it. Lefty will tell you what to be concerned about.

And don't ever call Lefty a communist. He's not a communist. That little prole cap is just an affectation.

what is political Darwinism? what is Darwinism?

 

[DC]

That's not proof. That's just saying words in a large font.

you believe the Yellowcake documents to be real?

 

[leftysergeant]

That's not proof. That's just saying words in a large font.

The merry morons lied about the yellow cake, about the mobile nerve gas labs, the long-range attack drones, ricin and all manner of vile nasty things that were absolutely sure to happen if we did not go in and whack Saddam.

It was all a lie. They were looking for an excuse to go get him before they officially held any offices. There was no way that the Shrub was going to allow Saddam to remain in power no matter what documentation he provided. The UN resolutions onlyt required force if Saddam did not comply. It looked to me like he was trying to comply, before Shrub told him to leave his own country.

What an idiot. There was no such provision in the UN resolution.

It was a war of choice. Only an idiot goes to a war of choice when he is hard-pressed to fund a war of neccessity.

If, after we pull out, Iraq falls into a more desolate state of tyranny, it will be trhe Shrub's fault for starting the war in the first place.

As for regime change being Bill Clinton's idea, bear in mind that Clinton didn't have to invade Serbia to oust Milosovic.

Republicans just don't know how to conduct a war.

 

[Virus]

That's not proof either. That's just re-assertion the claim with some extra garbage thrown in.

 

[leftysergeant]

That's not proof either. That's just re-assertion the claim with some extra garbage thrown in.

Okay, what on this list does not indicate that the PNAC mob in the White House did not lie to us to get us into a war?

1. There was no yellow cake.

2. There were no long-range attack drones.

3. There were no mobile chemical weapons vans.

4. There were no aluminum centrifuge tubes for uranium enrichment.

5. There were no stocks of ricin, anthrax or clostridia.

 

[Virus]

That's not lying. That's acting on mistaken intelligence.

 

[DC]

That's not lying. That's acting on mistaken intelligence.

in the 9/11 sub forum of this forum, that counts as lying.

 

[Toontown]

YELLOW CAKE.

Rummy never did a thing right in his life.

Yellowcake?

You mean this yellowcake?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

"The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program — a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium — reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.

The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions.

What's now left is the final and complicated push to clean up the remaining radioactive debris at the former Tuwaitha nuclear complex about 12 miles south of Baghdad — using teams that include Iraqi experts recently trained in the Chernobyl fallout zone in Ukraine."

<snip>

 

[Toontown]

Okay, what on this list does not indicate that the PNAC mob in the White House did not lie to us to get us into a war?

1. There was no yellow cake.

2. There were no long-range attack drones.

3. There were no mobile chemical weapons vans.

4. There were no aluminum centrifuge tubes for uranium enrichment.

5. There were no stocks of ricin, anthrax or clostridia.

Do you really think any of that matters? It doesn't do any good to make a list out of it. You're just grasping at straws.

Do you think Bill also lied to Hillary about Iraq's WMD programs, when he was president?

The object was to make certain the Hussein family never did have any of that stuff, ever again. Because, you see, it is fact that they had a clandestine nuclear program. It is fact that they had made and used chemical weapons.

Do you really think the whole kit and kaboodle of them had totally forgotten how to run a clandestine nuclear program, and how to make chemical weapons?

It is irrelevant whether they had any of that stuff at the time of invasion (they did have 550 tons of yellowcake, BTW). They had 3 months to hide or get rid of whatever they had, with troops massing on their border. It is totally UNsurprising that not much was found. All they had to do was pass the inspections, get the sanctions lifted, get the world's attention back on Israel, and it's back to business as usual, only quieter and sneakier this time.

Once again: if the invasion had not gone forward and the Husseins had gotten a clean bill of health by the inspectors, then the sanctions would have ended, and by now Saddam would be back in the saddle, oil-rich and riding hard. Or even worse, Uday. And just think how much they could jack up the price of a barrel of oil with just a little sabre-rattling.

The shot was there. Bush took it. Learn to live with it.

Bang bang, Maxwell's silver hammer came down on his head.
Bang bang, Maxwell's silver hammer made (SURE) he was dead.

 

[DC]

Yellowcake?

You mean this yellowcake?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

"The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program — a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium — reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.

The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions.

What's now left is the final and complicated push to clean up the remaining radioactive debris at the former Tuwaitha nuclear complex about 12 miles south of Baghdad — using teams that include Iraqi experts recently trained in the Chernobyl fallout zone in Ukraine."

<snip>

no that yellowcake was known and under UN controll.

Accusations that Saddam had tried to purchase more yellowcake from the African nation of Niger — and an article by a former U.S. ambassador refuting the claims — led to a wide-ranging probe into Washington leaks that reached high into the Bush administration.

Tuwaitha and an adjacent research facility were well known for decades as the centerpiece of Saddam's nuclear efforts.

Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.

 

[Praktik]

If Saddam had stayed, how would the 101 Keyboard Brigade have Proven their Toughness??

 

[leftysergeant]

That's not lying. That's acting on mistaken intelligence.

No. The Shrub deliberately lied about the yellow cake. He sent someone to check it out. He knew it was bogus. That is not bad intel. It's a lie. And then his merry morons committed a heinous crime, which may very well have resulted in numerous murders (of which we may never be permitted to learn for obvious reasons) just to discredit the man who called BS on the operation.

 

[willhaven]

If Saddam had stayed, how would the 101 Keyboard Brigade have Proven their Toughness??

If Saddam had stayed, we'd all be speaking Iraqi.

 

[Toontown]

It was all a lie. They were looking for an excuse to go get him before they officially held any offices.

They knew the Husseins had gotten rid of all their WMD stuff? How do you know they knew that? And, as I explained above, did it really matter? The oil was there. The wealth was there. The knowledge was there. The WMD had been there. The WMD could be there again.

But getting back to how the "merry morons" knew there was no WMD any more and no threat of it in the future. How did the "merry morons" know that? No one else knew it. In fact Putin warned Bush that Russian intelligence had gotten wind of a possible impending WMD attack by Iraq, on the US. No woo. True.

So how did the "merry morons" know what no one else knew? And how did you know what even Russian intelligence did not know?

There was no way that the Shrub was going to allow Saddam to remain in power no matter what documentation he provided.

I'm sure you're right about that, for whatever you think it gains you. After all, regime change in Iraq had become a US policy goal under Clinton. And then 9/11 provided the impetus to get rid of some enemies.

Scratch one enemy. Cry a little, if you must. But then move on.

The UN resolutions only required force if Saddam did not comply. It looked to me like he was trying to comply...

And it looked to me like he was temporarily trying to comply. And why wouldn't he, with troops massing on his border? Of course he was temporarily trying to comply. But that is beside the point.

The resolution gave Saddam a chance to convince Bush, Blair, et al that he would be a good boy henceforth. Not that he would temporarily try to comply, solely for the purpose of squirming loose from the sanctions.

Saddam failed to convince them that he had turned over a new leaf. They remained convinced that he was just temporarily trying to comply, without really even fully complying. He wasn't even very good at pretending to comply.

the authorization to use force existed. the shot was there. They took it.

...before Shrub told him to leave his own country.

And now you're playing the sympathy card.

You lose.

Sometimes it seems you even think like Saddam. Iraq was HIS country, was it? Because HE seized it and ruled it with a rod of iron for 30 years, making HIM sovereign and inviolate? Which, in turn, made a fourth of earth's oil reserves all HIS? Because HE took it, fair and square?

No, that just made him a particularly inconvenient tyrant.

What an idiot. There was no such provision in the UN resolution.

Yes there was. The authorization to use force remained in force, as reiterated by 1441. The resolution merely gave Saddam an unspecified amount of time to convince Bush, Blair, et al that he wasn't worth overthrowing.

But they decided he was worth it. Cue "taps". Game over. Get over it. Move on.

If, after we pull out, Iraq falls into a more desolate state of tyranny, it will be trhe Shrub's fault for starting the war in the first place.

Willitnow.

Why wouldn't it be the Iraqis' fault, for falling into a more desolate state of tyranny? They were handed the keys to a brand new democratic republic. Why is it our fault if they crash it?

Are we now quibbling over the relative merits of various subjectively desolate future states of tyranny, versus past states of tyranny? And why are we doing that, pray tell? Because passing judgement on a hypothetical future state of tyranny in Iraq serves your strange little political agenda? Well, UP your strange little political agenda. I don't wanna play.

As for regime change being Bill Clinton's idea, bear in mind that Clinton didn't have to invade Serbia to oust Milosovic.

And by that reasoning (all tyrants are equally easy to oust without invading), we don't even need an army. We can oust any tyrant with air power alone. Or spook power. Just infiltrate some CIA agents and start a revolution.

Leaving aside the liberty you took by claiming that Clinton did, in fact, oust Milosevec.

Republicans just don't know how to conduct a war.

Neither does Obama. Never knew war, never studied war. Was a community organizer who was in congress for a couple of years. That's why the smart politikers let the generals conduct the wars, and usually lose when they don't. (see Hitler)

 

[leftysergeant]

They knew the Husseins had gotten rid of all their WMD stuff?

Do you have documentation from the UN inspectors who were in country that he was refusing to cooperate at the time of the invasion?

But getting back to how the "merry morons" knew there was no WMD any more and no threat of it in the future. How did the "merry morons" know that? No one else knew it. In fact Putin warned Bush that Russian intelligence had gotten wind of a possible impending WMD attack by Iraq, on the US. No woo. True.

You trust Putin?

So how did the "merry morons" know what no one else knew? And how did you know what even Russian intelligence did not know?

The only thing the general public did not know but that the PNAC gang knew was that they pulled ity out of their butts.

And then 9/11 provided the impetus to get rid of some enemies.

Scratch one enemy. Cry a little, if you must. But then move on.

That was causus belli in Afghanistan. It was not a reason to throw away the lives of hundreds of our soldiers in Iraq.

And it looked to me like he was temporarily trying to comply. And why wouldn't he, with troops massing on his border? Of course he was temporarily trying to comply. But that is beside the point.

Bull flops. He was more secure against foreign enemies with the inspectors there and with international monitoring of his borders. Iran was still a threat. He had nothing to lose going withoput WMDs if he didn't have to worry about Iran.

Saddam failed to convince them that he had turned over a new leaf. They remained convinced that he was just temporarily trying to comply, without really even fully complying.

There is no way to convince a malevolent moron of anything once he has decided to whack you.

Why wouldn't it be the Iraqis' fault, for falling into a more desolate state of tyranny? They were handed the keys to a brand new democratic republic. Why is it our fault if they crash it?

Because it was designed by the sorriest bunch of kakiocrats ever to run the USA and imposed on them at the point of a gun. Makes as much sense as insisting that supply-side ecconomics works. That was, in fact, part of PNAC's plan for Iraq. They're screwed.

And by that reasoning (all tyrants are equally easy to oust without invading), we don't even need an army. We can oust any tyrant with air power alone. Or spook power. Just infiltrate some CIA agents and start a revolution.

Leaving aside the liberty you took by claiming that Clinton did, in fact, oust Milosevec.

Where did Milosovic die and how many of our people died to oust him? Our actions were a key factor in his overthrow.

Neither does Obama. Never knew war, never studied war. Was a community organizer who was in congress for a couple of years. That's why the smart politikers let the generals conduct the wars, and usually lose when they don't. (see Hitler)

Obama pays more attention to the advice of military people than the Shrub did.

They fired Shinseki because he called BS on Rummy's assessment of the requirements for an invasion.

Stupidity won the day.

 

[BeAChooser]

1. There was no yellow cake.

Actually, we don't know that for a fact.

But regarding your assertion that Bush lied about Iraq attempting to acquire uranium from Niger when he said "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa", George Tenet, Director of CIA, stated the following when that statement became controversial:

Legitimate questions have arisen about how remarks on alleged Iraqi attempts to obtain uranium in Africa made it into the President’s State of the Union speech. Let me be clear about several things right up front. First, CIA approved the President’s State of the Union address before it was delivered. Second, I am responsible for the approval process in my Agency. And third, the President had every reason to believe that the text presented to him was sound.

But with regards to lying, what about Wilson, the guy on your side of this issue who started the Bush lied about "yellow cake" claim?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html

Wilson's assertions -- both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information -- were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report. The panel found that Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address. ... snip ... The report also said Wilson provided misleading information to The Washington Post last June. He said then that he concluded the Niger intelligence was based on documents that had clearly been forged because "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong." "Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the 'dates were wrong and the names were wrong' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports," the Senate panel said. Wilson told the panel he may have been confused and may have "misspoken" to reporters. The documents -- purported sales agreements between Niger and Iraq -- were not in U.S. hands until eight months after Wilson made his trip to Niger."

In fact,

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/217wnmrb.asp

July 7, 2004. On that date, the bipartisan Senate Select Intelligence Committee
released a 511-page report on the intelligence that served as the foundation for
the Bush administration's case for war in Iraq. The Senate report includes a
48-page section on Wilson that demonstrates, in painstaking detail, that
virtually everything Joseph Wilson said publicly about his trip, from its
origins to his conclusions, was false.

Now, regarding Iraq's Uranium stockpiles and what Saddam intended to do with it …


http://commonsenselogic.blogspot.com/2008/07/uranium-stockpile-yellowcake-removed.html

JULY 06, 2008

Well…it looks like Bush was right all along. Not only was Saddam looking for yellowcake but apparently he did find it and bought it.

But wait, 550 tons of yellowcake uranium? I thought the UN weapons inspectors removed all of Saddam’s yellowcake uranium from 1991-1998? Apparently not and thus Saddam was able to rebuild his nuclear program and would have been able to make nuclear weapons from 550 tons of yellowcake uranium.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008034876_apiraqyellowcakemission.html

July 6, 2008

AP Exclusive: US removes uranium from Iraq


… snip …

The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" - the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment - was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/2/220331.shtml

In its May 22, 2004 edition, the New York Times confirmed a myriad of reports on Saddam's nuclear fuel stockpile - and revealed a chilling detail unknown to weapons inspectors before the war: that Saddam had begun to partially enrich his uranium stash.

The Times noted:

"The repository, at Tuwaitha, a centerpiece of Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program, . . . . holds more than 500 tons of uranium . . . . Some 1.8 tons is classified as low-enriched uranium."

Thomas B. Cochran, director of the nuclear program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told the Times that "the low-enriched version could be useful to a nation with nuclear ambitions."

Here's more:

The physicist tapped by Saddam to run his centrifuge program says that after the first Gulf War, the program was largely dismantled. But it wasn't destroyed.

In fact, according to what he wrote in his 2004 book, "The Bomb in My Garden," Dr. Mahdi Obeidi told U.S. interrogators: "Saddam kept funding the IAEC [Iraq Atomic Energy Commission] from 1991 ... until the war in 2003."

"I was developing the centrifuge for the weapons" right through 1997, he revealed.

And after that, Dr. Obeidi said, Saddam ordered him under penalty of death to keep the technology available to resume Iraq's nuke program at a moment's notice.

Dr. Obeidi said he buried "the full set of blueprints, designs - everything to restart the centrifuge program - along with some critical components of the centrifuge" under the garden of his Baghdad home.

And yes, inspectors did find the blueprints and components, corroborating Dr Obeidi's claims.

2. There were no long-range attack drones.

I guess that depends on what you mean by long range, lefty?

The fact is, Iraq was caught illegally developing and testing UAVs (drones) with ranges well beyond the allowed limits. They were also working on missiles well beyond that allowed limits. The ISG's report stated that Iraq began secretly developing proscribed missile programs beginning in 1997. The ISG gathered testimony from missile designers at the Al Kini State Company that Iraq had begun work on converting SA-2 missiles into ballistic missiles with an intended range of 250km. Iraq also was developing a solid-propellant ballistic missile that would have exceeded the 150 km range limit. The ISG obtained testimony that the goal was a a missile varying in range between 400 to 1000km. There were also attempts to convert surface-to-air missiles into surface-to-surface missiles with ranges in excess of UN limitations. Iraq also continued work on two cruise missile programs and a new longer range (UAV).

Here is some of what Dr Kay, who headed the ISG during the investigatory timeframe, told Congress they'd found regarding Iraq's delivery systems:

http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/dkay100203.html

Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:

... snip ...

• Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.

• Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.

• Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.

... snip ...

With regard to delivery systems, the ISG team has discovered sufficient evidence to date to conclude that the Iraqi regime was committed to delivery system improvements that would have, if OIF had not occurred, dramatically breached UN restrictions placed on Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War.

Detainees and co-operative sources indicate that beginning in 2000 Saddam ordered the development of ballistic missiles with ranges of at least 400km and up to 1000km and that measures to conceal these projects from UNMOVIC were initiated in late-2002, ahead of the arrival of inspectors. Work was also underway for a clustered engine liquid propellant missile, and it appears the work had progressed to a point to support initial prototype production of some parts and assemblies. According to a cooperating senior detainee, Saddam concluded that the proposals from both the liquid-propellant and solid-propellant missile design centers would take too long. For instance, the liquid-propellant missile project team forecast first delivery in six years. Saddam countered in 2000 that he wanted the missile designed and built inside of six months. On the other hand several sources contend that Saddam's range requirements for the missiles grew from 400-500km in 2000 to 600-1000km in 2002.

ISG has gathered testimony from missile designers at Al Kindi State Company that Iraq has reinitiated work on converting SA-2 Surface-to-Air Missiles into ballistic missiles with a range goal of about 250km. Engineering work was reportedly underway in early 2003, despite the presence of UNMOVIC. This program was not declared to the UN. ISG is presently seeking additional confirmation and details on this project. A second cooperative source has stated that the program actually began in 2001, but that it received added impetus in the run-up to OIF, and that missiles from this project were transferred to a facility north of Baghdad. This source also provided documentary evidence of instructions to convert SA-2s into surface-to-surface missiles.

ISG has obtained testimony from both detainees and cooperative sources that indicate that proscribed-range solid-propellant missile design studies were initiated, or already underway, at the time when work on the clustered liquid-propellant missile designs began.* The motor diameter was to be 800 to 1000mm, i.e. much greater than the 500-mm Ababil-100. The range goals cited for this system vary from over 400km up to 1000km, depending on the source and the payload mass.

A cooperative source, involved in the 2001-2002 deliberations on the long-range solid propellant project, provided ISG with a set of concept designs for a launcher designed to accommodate a 1m diameter by 9m length missile. The limited detail in the drawings suggest there was some way to go before launcher fabrication. The source believes that these drawings would not have been requested until the missile progress was relatively advanced, normally beyond the design state. The drawing are in CAD format, with files dated 09/01/02.

... snip ...

Iraq was continuing to develop a variety of UAV platforms and maintained two UAV programs that were working in parallel, one at Ibn Fernas and one at al-Rashid Air Force Base. Ibn Fernas worked on the development of smaller, more traditional types of UAVs in addition to the conversion of manned aircraft into UAVs. This program was not declared to the UN until the 2002 CAFCD in which Iraq declared the RPV-20, RPV-30 and Pigeon RPV systems to the UN. All these systems had declared ranges of less than 150km. Several Iraqi officials stated that the RPV-20 flew over 500km on autopilot in 2002, contradicting Iraq's declaration on the system's range.

... snip ...

ISG has discovered evidence of two primary cruise missile programs. The first appears to have been successfully implemented, whereas the second had not yet reached maturity at the time of OIF.

The first involved upgrades to the HY-2 coastal-defense cruise missile. ISG has developed multiple sources of testimony, which is corroborated in part by a captured document, that Iraq undertook a program aimed at increasing the HY-2's range and permitting its use as a land-attack missile. These efforts extended the HY-2's range from its original 100km to 150-180km. Ten modified missiles were delivered to the military prior to OIF and two of these were fired from Umm Qasr during OIF - one was shot down and one hit Kuwait.

The second program, called the Jenin, was a much more ambitious effort to convert the HY-2 into a 1000km range land-attack cruise missile. The Jenin concept was presented to Saddam on 23 November 2001 and received what cooperative sources called an "unusually quick response" in little more than a week. The essence of the concept was to take an HY-2, strip it of its liquid rocket engine, and put in its place a turbine engine from a Russian helicopter - the TV-2-117 or TV3-117 from a Mi-8 or Mi-17helicopter. To prevent discovery by the UN, Iraq halted engine development and testing and disassembled the test stand in late 2002 before the design criteria had been met.

In addition to the activities detailed here on Iraq's attempts to develop delivery systems beyond the permitted UN 150km, ISG has also developed information on Iraqi attempts to purchase proscribed missiles and missile technology. Documents found by ISG describe a high level dialogue between Iraq and North Korea that began in December 1999 and included an October 2000 meeting in Baghdad. These documents indicate Iraqi interest in the transfer of technology for surface-to-surface missiles with a range of 1300km (probably No Dong) and land-to-sea missiles with a range of 300km.

In fact, a document was found after the ISG effort ended which shows that Iraq actually transferred 10 million dollars to the North Koreans in late 2002 to purchase an intermediate range missile.

So Bush was correct in being concerned that Iraq was exploring ways of using long range UAVs and missles in violation of agreements not to even research such weapon system. And, once again we find you don't know what you are talking about, lefty.

3. There were no mobile chemical weapons vans.

A joint CIA/DIA report concluded the trailers in question were bio-weapons labs. The six-page document titled 'Iraqi Mobile Biological Warfare Agent Production Plants' concluded that there could be no other purpose for the trailers beyond biological weapons. Yet you want to insist that Bush lied.

Also, how do you explain the recordings of Iraqi military officers they played to the UN discussing how to hide "special" vehicles? Do you know that documents found in Iraq after the war confirmed that the production of mobile labs (which the Duelfer report concluded had ended in 1997) were still being manufactured in 2002? Files from 1999, marked “Top Secret”, confirm that the Iraqi army had a "chemical platoon" that was undergoing training in every form of illegal chemical weapon. And by 2001, the regime ensured that their chemical platoons had mobile shower vehicles for decontamination. Iraq certainly had a lot of interest in WMD for a country who you folks claim destroyed everything associated with it in 1991.

4. There were no aluminum centrifuge tubes for uranium enrichment.

The HEAD of the nuclear inspection team admitted that the tubes could be used for enrichment.

USA TODAY, "Inspector: Tubes Could Have Nuclear Use" , Jan 29, 2003, by DAFNA LINZER, Associated Press "UNITED NATIONS - The top nuclear inspector conceded Wednesday that aluminum tubes the Iraqis had sought for rockets could be modified for a nuclear program, as President Bush reasserted in his State of the Union address."

5. There were no stocks of ricin, anthrax or clostridia.

Perhaps … but ...

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd/Iraq_Oct_2002.htm

The Fallujah III Castor Oil Production Plant is situated on a large complex with an historical connection to Iraq's CW program.* Of immediate BW concern is the potential production of ricin toxin.[7]* Castor bean pulp, left over from castor oil production, can be used to extract ricin toxin.* Iraq admitted to UNSCOM that it manufactured ricin and field-tested it in artillery shells before the Gulf war.* Iraq operated this plant for legitimate purposes under UNSCOM scrutiny before 1998 when UN inspectors left the country.* Since 1999, Iraq has rebuilt major structures destroyed during Operation Desert Fox.* Iraqi officials claim they are making castor oil for brake fluid, but verifying such claims without UN inspections is impossible.

In addition to questions about activity at known facilities, there are compelling reasons to be concerned about BW activity at other sites and in mobile production units and laboratories.* Baghdad has pursued a mobile BW research and production capability to better conceal its program. *

• UNSCOM uncovered a document on Iraqi Military Industrial Commission letterhead indicating that Iraq was interested in developing mobile fermentation units, and an Iraqi scientist admitted to UN inspectors that Iraq was trying to move in the direction of mobile BW production.

• Iraq has now established large-scale, redundant, and concealed BW agent production capabilities based on mobile BW facilities.*

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/bw-isg.htm

Although ISG could not find evidence of any direct work on BW agents, ISG did uncover reports of secret laboratories run by the Iraqi Intelligence Services (IIS). IIS had been involved in Iraq's BW program from its inception in the 1970s, both providing protection and conducting research, so such a revelation would be in keeping with IIS's historical relationship with Iraq's BW program. There was information that suggested that up to 5 IIS laboratories operated in the greater Baghdad area at various times up until Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Some of the laboratories possessed equipment capable of supporting research into BW agents for military purposes, but ISG does not know whether this occurred although there is no evidence of it. The laboratories were probably the successors of the Al Salman facility, located three kilometers south of Salman Pak, which was destroyed in 1991, and they carried on many of the same activities, including forensic work. Although unconfirmed by ISG, reports from former IIS officials—a former IIS chemist and his former supervisor, the late Dr. Al Azmirli, stated that IIS was involved in the research and limited production of ricin for the development of a BW weapon. Reports also indicated that human experiments had been part of the IIS program. ISG estimated that IIS's interest was almost certainly based on its limited developed use as an assassination weapon.

… snip …

ISG judged that the TABRC became the primary facility continuing B. thuringiensis research after Al Hakam’s destruction in 1996, but ISG lacked evidence that this research was intended as a simulation for anthrax research. However, undeclared pieces of equipment including fermentors were found at TABRC by ISG and an important former anthrax production expert was reported to have worked routinely at the facility from 2000 to 2003, which made ISG suspicious of the true nature of the work done there.

… snip …

Although no active BW program existed at Iraq's biological plants, ISG judged that a break-out production capability existed at one site, the State Company for Drug Industries and Medical Appliances, SDI, at Samarra. Since Iraq could relocate production assets such as fermentors, other sites with basic utilities could also be converted for break-out. A full program to include R&D and production or even just large scale production would require months rather than weeks to re-initiate in a break-out context. ISG assesses the SDI to have the fixed assets that could be converted for BW agent production within four to five weeks after the decision to do so, including utilities, personnel with know-how, and the equipment (with slight modifications) required. Media and additional less-skilled personnel could be obtained. ISG also judged the movable assets at the Al Dawrah FMDV Plant could provide the core of an alternative break-out capability at any other suitable site in Iraq, perhaps within 2 to 3 weeks after the decision to do so. If such a break-out were to take place, ISG judged that Bacillus anthracis (anthrax) would be the germ of choice, since antrax was the only BW in Iraq's historical arsenal.

You just keep your head in the sand, lefty.

 

[Toontown]

Do you have documentation from the UN inspectors who were in country that he was refusing to cooperate at the time of the invasion?

I would fully expect Saddam to do his best to make it appear that he was clean and cooperative. I would not expect Saddam to remain clean and cooperative after successfully squirming out of the sanctions.

You trust Putin?

Do I need to Trust Putin to use him as an example of the widespread belief that Saddam was nuts and had WMD?

Bull flops. He was more secure against foreign enemies with the inspectors there and with international monitoring of his borders. Iran was still a threat. He had nothing to lose going withoput WMDs if he didn't have to worry about Iran.

He had plenty to lose. He had his dream of resurrecting Babylon to lose. People like Saddam don't just stop, give up, and comply. That's why people like Saddam so often end up controlling entire countries, regions, and peoples. They never stop. He gave up only when he was cornered in a hole in the ground.

There is no way to convince a malevolent moron of anything once he has decided to whack you.

Lots of people learned that lesson about Saddam the hard way.

Where did Milosovic die and how many of our people died to oust him? Our actions were a key factor in his overthrow.

If Saddam could have been ousted without invading, why didn't the omnipotent Clinton, the father of the regime change policy, do so? He had the time. He had the green light via Iraq Liberation Resolution. Judging by his anti-Saddam speeches, he had the want-to.

Obama pays more attention to the advice of military people than the Shrub did.

They fired Shinseki because he called BS on Rummy's assessment of the requirements for an invasion.

Stupidity won the day.

Strictly in the interest of the ongoing struggle to correct your many factual inconsistencies, I will remind you that General Shinseki was not fired. He served his full term and retired from the Army, only to be reactivated as head of the Veterans Administration. Not exactly the summary beheading you attempt to portray.

In fact, it was Rumsfeld, not Shinseki, who eventually had to fall on his sword. However, unlike you, I do not hate Rumsfeld. I see Rumsfeld as a good man who served the country well for a long time, and then fell victim to the odds. As his wife put it in a poem she stuck on the refigerator for him:

"They said the job could not be done, but he just went right to it.
He took the job that couldn't be done, and found he couldn't do it."

I completely agree with Shinseki's assessment that more troops were needed for the occupation. I do not agree that the job could not be done with fewer troops. The job was done with fewer troops.

 

[DC]

Trusted Putin and Ignored the BND.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/02/iraq.germany

 

[Virus]

If the administration made it all up, as LeftySergeant alleges, why were the troops inoculated against anthrax and smallpox before deployment? Why were they issued with NBC suits? If the administration was prepared to just invent intelligence out of thin air, why didn't they just continue the lie when the invasion forces failed to find any stockpiles of WMD?

 

[Virus]

As for regime change being Bill Clinton's idea, bear in mind that Clinton didn't have to invade Serbia to oust Milosovic.

Republicans just don't know how to conduct a war.

If America instigated a coup or revolt then who would come and attempt to fill the power vacuum? Islamofacist militas, the Fedayeen Saddam, Iranian proxies and so on. You'd have the exact same situation as the post-2003 insurgency except without the US-lead coalition to provide security and nation building. The US would have to intervene anyway because Al-Qaeda would be there and we're at war with Al-Qaeda and Islamofascism.