|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 2:12 pm Post subject: About Saddam & WMD |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Issues & Insights
Saddam Had WMD
Posted 2/24/2006
WMD: Now that Leno and Letterman have had their way with Vice President Cheney's hunting accident and the port controversy, maybe we can get back to something really important — like Saddam's WMD program.
Yes, the linchpin of opposition to the Iraq War — never really strong to begin with — has taken some real hits in recent weeks. And "Bush lied" — the anti-war mantra about the president, Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction — looks the most battered.
Inconveniently for critics of the war, Saddam made tapes in his version of the Oval Office. These tapes landed in the hands of American intelligence and were recently aired publicly.
The first 12 hours of the tapes — there are hundreds more waiting to be translated — are damning, to say the least. They show conclusively that Bush didn't lie when he cited Saddam's WMD plans as one of the big reasons for taking the dictator out.
Nobody disputes the tapes' authenticity. On them, Saddam talks openly of programs involving biological, chemical and, yes, nuclear weapons.
War foes have long asserted that Saddam halted his WMD programs in the wake of his defeat in the first Gulf War in 1991. Saddam's abandonment of WMD programs was confirmed by subsequent U.N. inspections.
Again, not true. In a tape dating to April 1995, Saddam and several aides discuss the fact that U.N. inspectors had found traces of Iraq's biological weapons program. On the tape, Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law, is heard gloating about fooling the inspectors.
"We did not reveal all that we have," he says. "Not the type of weapons, not the volume of the materials we imported, not the volume of the production we told them about, not the volume of use. None of this was correct."
There's more. Indeed, as late as 2000, Saddam can be heard in his office talking with Iraqi scientists about his ongoing plans to build a nuclear device. At one point, he discusses Iraq's plasma uranium program — something that was missed entirely by U.N. weapons inspectors combing Iraq for WMD.
This is particularly troubling, since it indicates an active, ongoing attempt by Saddam to build an Iraqi nuclear bomb.
"What was most disturbing," said John Tierney, the ex- FBI agent who translated the tapes, "was the fact that the individuals briefing Saddam were totally unknown to the U.N. Special Commission (or UNSCOM, the group set up to look into Iraq's WMD programs)."
Perhaps most chillingly, the tapes record Iraq Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz talking about how easy it would be to set off a WMD in Washington. The comments come shortly after Saddam muses about using "proxies" in a terror attack.
9-11, anyone?
In short, let us repeat: President Bush was right. We had to invade to disarm Saddam — otherwise, he would have completely reconstituted his chemical, nuclear and bio-weapons programs when inspectors left.
Saddam probably knew better than to use them himself against the U.S. But it's likely he wouldn't have hesitated giving one or more to terror groups with which he had routine contact.
Lest you think we're making the case entirely based on these tapes, let us assure you that other evidence — mounting by the day — points to the same conclusion.
We've been very impressed by the story told by Georges Sada, the former No. 2 in Iraq's air force. He has written a book, "Saddam's Secrets," that details how the Iraqi dictator used trucks, commercial jets and ships to remove his WMD from the country. At the time, the move went largely undetected, because Iraq pretended the massive movement of materiel was to help Syrian flood victims.
Nor is Sada alone. Ali Ibrahim, another of Saddam's former commanders, has largely corroborated Sada's story.
So how was Saddam able to use his "cheat and retreat" tactics without being found out? He had help, according to a former U.S. Defense Department official.
"The short answer to the question of where the WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went was that they went to Syria and Lebanon," said John Shaw, former deputy undersecretary of defense, in comments made at an intelligence summit Feb. 17-20 in Arlington, Va.
"They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special ops) units out of uniform that were specifically sent to Iraq to move the weaponry and eradicate any evidence of its existence," he said.
These are extraordinary developments. They deserve a full airing in the media, since they essentially validate part of Bush's casus belli for invading Iraq and deposing the murderous Saddam.
But once again, the mainstream media have dropped the ball. They seem more interested in Dick Cheney's marksmanship and American port management than in setting the record straight about one of the most important developments of our time. |
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&artnum=1&issue=20060224 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This only serves to prove that Saddam didn't have NCB weapons when Iraq was invaded. So,they think he sent it to Syria? Obvious choice, but not necessarily the right one.
He used "proxies" for a terrorist attack, so it must be 9/11? Where's the proof?
Joo, is this the best you can do? I'm disappointed. You're usually smarter than that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinglejangle
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Location: Far far far away.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that Joo is mostly interested in the part he highlighted.
Correct me if I'm wrong Joo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sure, Saddam probably thought he had WMD. "Thought" being the key word there. Would you have wanted to be the poindexter who had to inform the man that he didn't, in fact, have nukes and stockpiles of anthrax and ricin? Not much of a future in that one. Better to let him think what he wanted, after all what were the chances the Americans would be dumb enough to...
oh. Really? They did? Huh, no kidding. Wow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Sure, Saddam probably thought he had WMD. "Thought" being the key word there |
Then I guess you cant blame the americans for believing so as well. If they could convince the leader of their country by faking it, then probably the US using the same info were fooled as well. Is that their fault then, as a scam of this magnitude would have been pretty tight, especially when being found out would have been a bullet in the noggin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| When did they get their hands on these tapes? If the American agents were capable of getting recordings of what went on within Saddam Hussein's offices prior to the invasion, they might have also known there were no NBC weapons left in Iraq before they attacked. Attacking once they had proof Saddam didn't have such weapons would have been the most strategically sensible thing to do, no? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Let me see... tapes from three years before the invasion are evidence that weapons were in Iraq at the time of the invasion??? Even though exactly zero have been found to date, three years after the invasion was launched?
If the dates on these tapes were post-2003, you'd have my attention. Given they are not, you have only my laughing at you for being such a Bush apologist that reality cannot penetrate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Sure, Saddam probably thought he had WMD. "Thought" being the key word there |
Then I guess you cant blame the americans for believing so as well. If they could convince the leader of their country by faking it, then probably the US using the same info were fooled as well. Is that their fault then, as a scam of this magnitude would have been pretty tight, especially when being found out would have been a bullet in the noggin. |
Under this scenario the US should have had much better information than Saddam. He was living in a bubble of his own creation where people under him were afraid to tell him the truth. The US, on the other hand, had satellites, a network of defectors, and an entire intelligence bureacracy aimed at figuring out what Saddam had. And, wouldn't you know it, the general conclusion was "no WMD" until the Bush admin. came around and said "we want you to decide there are WMD". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
supernick
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Then I guess you cant blame the americans for believing so as well. |
They believed because they waned to believe. The other reason would most likely be a lack of intelligence on all fronts.
Your government paraded so-called evidence on the world stage that Iraq had such weapons, and most importantly, that he was going to use them. It was wrong. Not just a little, but very wrong. Now you've made a mess of things and others will have to come in and clean up your mess.
Four years later, without a trace of any of these weapons, there are still some who think they were moved, and in fact that Saddam did have such weaponn leading up to the invasion. If they were moved, I'm sure we would have seen some accurate spy photos of the weapons being moved into Syria by now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
Let me see... tapes from three years before the invasion are evidence that weapons were in Iraq at the time of the invasion??? Even though exactly zero have been found to date, three years after the invasion was launched?
(1) If the dates on these tapes were post-2003, you'd have my attention. Given they are not, you have only my laughing at you for being such a Bush apologist that reality cannot penetrate. |
(1) Exactly how could the dates on these tapes be post-2003? That's when the country was invaded. Nothing like setting up impossible conditions in order not to believe inconvienent information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| supernick wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Then I guess you cant blame the americans for believing so as well. |
They believed because they waned to believe. The other reason would most likely be a lack of intelligence on all fronts.
Your government paraded so-called evidence on the world stage that Iraq had such weapons, and most importantly, that he was going to use them. It was wrong. Not just a little, but very wrong. Now you've made a mess of things and others will have to come in and clean up your mess.
Four years later, without a trace of any of these weapons, there are still some who think they were moved, and in fact that Saddam did have such weaponn leading up to the invasion.
(1) If they were moved, I'm sure we would have seen some accurate spy photos of the weapons being moved into Syria by now. |
(1) If the weapons were hid in trucks and containers, all we would have is spy photos of said trucks and containers going into Syria which in fact is what we do have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
Let me see... tapes from three years before the invasion are evidence that weapons were in Iraq at the time of the invasion??? Even though exactly zero have been found to date, three years after the invasion was launched?
(1) If the dates on these tapes were post-2003, you'd have my attention. Given they are not, you have only my laughing at you for being such a Bush apologist that reality cannot penetrate. |
(1) Exactly how could the dates on these tapes be post-2003? That's when the country was invaded. Nothing like setting up impossible conditions in order not to believe inconvienent information. |
Wow. Your post dropped the world's IQ. Read my post again. Your response was nonsense. Literally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| He was living in a bubble of his own creation |
The same could be said for US intelligence services then. I am not of the opinion that the US intelligence services are next to God in the ability to see and understand everything. Yes, the US may have satelites, may have recording devices, but it has been proven in the past that if you don't have someone on the ground in the vicinity, then intelligence is not confirmed.
If you disagree, then please explain to me as to why the US intelligence services can't tell the worlds public what Osama had for breakfast today, and if they can tell us that.
Why is he still breathing  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
Let me see... tapes from three years before the invasion are evidence that weapons were in Iraq at the time of the invasion??? Even though exactly zero have been found to date, three years after the invasion was launched?
If the dates on these tapes were post-2003, you'd have my attention. Given they are not, you have only my laughing at you for being such a Bush apologist that reality cannot penetrate. |
Doesn't sound much like a guy who intended to give up his quest for WMDs, or give up his war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
Let me see... tapes from three years before the invasion are evidence that weapons were in Iraq at the time of the invasion??? Even though exactly zero have been found to date, three years after the invasion was launched?
If the dates on these tapes were post-2003, you'd have my attention. Given they are not, you have only my laughing at you for being such a Bush apologist that reality cannot penetrate. |
Doesn't sound much like a guy who intended to give up his quest for WMDs, or give up his war. |
Say someting relevant, Joo. The facts are simple: Bush claimed he had them, but none have been found. Whether he had them or not, Bush was going to war, so it's not even a valid argument anymore. Too mnay memos have come up that show conclusively Bush engineered this war.
Get over it. He's a war criminal, plain and simple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
