Saddam Had No WMD's or programs

B

bountyh

Moderator
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20041006_756.html

Report: Saddam Not in Pursuit of Weapons
Report Finds Saddam Didn't Pursue Weapons Program, Undercuts Bush Rationale for Invading Iraq

The Associated Press


WASHINGTON Oct. 6, 2004 — Undercutting the Bush's administration's rationale for invading Iraq, the final report of the chief U.S. arms inspector concludes that Saddam Hussein did not vigorously pursue a program to develop weapons of mass destruction when international inspectors left Baghdad in 1998, an administration official said Wednesday.
In drafts, weapons hunter Charles Duelfer concluded that Saddam's Iraq had no stockpiles of the banned weapons but said he found signs of idle programs that Saddam could have revived once international attention waned.



"It appears that he did not vigorously pursue those programs after the inspectors left," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity in advance of the report's release.

Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group, was providing his findings Wednesday to the Senate Armed Services Committee. His team has compiled a 1,500-page report. Duelfer's predecessor, David Kay, who quit last December, also found no evidence of weapons stockpiles.
 
Well, looks like the entire world was wrong. Everybody (except Blitz, perhaps) thought he had them before we went in.


Kind of amazing really. We've got this looooong list of people saying that Saddam has WMDs BEFORE we go in. I mean it includes extreme liberal Democrats like Kennedy and Kerry, Clinton, etc. and it includes heads of state in Europe and just about everywhere else. Oh, and Republicans, too.


And of all these people who were saying that Saddam had WMD, only Bush and his administration were lying when they said that.


Just amazing.
 
Kind of amazing really. We've got this looooong list of people saying that Saddam has WMDs BEFORE we go in.
Click to expand...
Actually, I was one of them. I thought he retained stockpiles of VX from the Iran war. The problem is: they were gone. The WMD's had all been destroyed and we found that out when we ransacked the country. Bottom line, the intel was unrelaiable because it came from a biased source (Iraqi expatriots trying to get the US to depose Saddam) and that faulty intel was accepted without question because it was what Bush wanted to hear. Bottom line: the inspectors were right. That doesn't mean the UN is great, just that they were right this time.
 
Actually, I was one of them. I thought he retained stockpiles of VX from the Iran war. The problem is: they were gone. The WMD's had all been destroyed and we found that out when we ransacked the country.
Click to expand...
Which begs the question, "Why didn't Saddam come clean?" Why didn't Saddam show that the weapons were gone, rather than play out this charade? Really, if he had, it's quite likely that sanctions would have been lifted and he would still be dictator.

It just doesn't seem logical that he would comply in reality, then play games like he had not complied.

Or is logic something that shouldn't be applied to the actions of dictators?
 
Burden is upon the probationer to show that he possesses no deadly weapons. Kindly Uncle Saddam failed his burden and his time was executed (just about). :D
 
speaking on condition of anonymity in advance of the report's release.
Click to expand...
Nothing like using this source as "proof" the majority of the world's nations were wrong about Iraq. Especially given there is documentary evidence found in Iraq stating just the opposite.
 
damn.. they lied to us.. lied to ALL of us!

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological
weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has
also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
 
and that faulty intel was accepted without question because it was what Bush wanted to hear.
Click to expand...
It was accepted without question because there would be ZERO reason for anyone to destroy all of those weapons without letting the world know that they did. It wasn't just accepted by Bush, it was accepted by anyone with a brain that is capable of well-reasoned thought.
Burden is upon the probationer to show that he possesses no deadly weapons. Kindly Uncle Saddam failed his burden and his time was executed (just about).
Click to expand...
Bingo!


The idea that we couldawouldashouldakindasortamighta known that Sadam was indeed bereft of things he was notorious for having AND using is so typical of the fruitcake left. What's next with you people? Suggesting that we start a Secretary of Psychic Friends Department in John "Victor Charlie" Kerry's potential cabinet?

I'll stick with what is known. One of two people is about to be elected President. One is a ChiComSymp rat of epic and known proportions. Said rat also has a record of batting 1000% when it comes to gun grabbing, ergo he is a known enemy of my beloved country. For the slow on the uptake that means I'm not going to spend time second guessing "what might have been", rather, I am going to do everything I can to assure that President Bush gets re-elected.
 
Actually....all that has been PROVED is that we can't find them all.

I remember seeing the pics of a bunch of fighters buried in the desert.

Key Words "It appears"
 
Or is logic something that shouldn't be applied to the actions of dictators?
Click to expand...

Well, while I agree that your argument is sound, and needs to be answered by the "BUSH LIED!" crowd, I do think that logic does not ALWAYS govern the actions of dictators like Saddam. Take a look at the history of dictators - these megalomaniacs usually do things that are not logical at some point in their lives.
 
Or is logic something that shouldn't be applied to the actions of dictators?
Click to expand...
Logic is something that shouldn't be applied to anything democrats say. They are well known for not letting facts stand in the way of a good story.
 
OK, if there were NO programs and NO weapons, where did the Yellow-cake uranium come from?

Where did the 155mm Shells with chemical agents (one used against US troops and causing two casulties come from?

Perhaps Kerry's Red buddies provided the materials and weapons.

Geoff
Who notes selective reading by the Commie front press is a classic. :mad:
 
All this bickering about WMD's :barf:

Let's look at the big picture, we went into Iraq because we needed to seriously stomp some Islamofascist butt to send a message to that part of the world. Iraq is right in the middle of the problem. It borders Iran, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and all them oil derrick sized states. It was done to send a message. It did. Saddam conveniently gave us an excuse and needed to go anyway.

Get your nose out of Sun Tsu and read some Clausewitz.
 
It was accepted without question because there would be ZERO reason for anyone to destroy all of those weapons without letting the world know that they did.
Click to expand...

Except border security with Iran, who they used gas against to combat the last invasion.
 
Except border security with Iran, who they used gas against to combat the last invasion.
Click to expand...
Except now they had the United States of America threatening... NO MAKE THAT PROMISING, their utter anihilation if Iraq was not forthcoming with the whereabouts of said weapons, and/or the place of said weapons destruction.

You got your ignore list wish.
 
Last edited:
That's just giving the Iranians alot of credit for logic.


And, thank you! (Though Fred is not reading this.)
 
So, does anybody believe he might have actually hid something in 12 years?

We know he hard 'em.

We know he used 'em.

We know he had 12 years to get rid of 'em or hide 'em.

Doesn't sound that hard to me.
 
psychic friends?

He dont need em, he can just have little john "channel" the bad guys. Come to think of it why didnt johnny boy just channel saddam and read his mind? E.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top