Now that everybody in the world knows that Saddam had no WMD, maybe this can stop being a political issue and we can actually look at the WMD that Saddam really had. From NewsMax, with thanks to Joyce:
Is it really true that Saddam Hussein had no "stockpiles" of weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invaded in March 2003?Not exactly - at least not if one counts the 500 tons of uranium that the Iraqi dictator kept stored at his al Tuwaitha nuclear weapons development plant.
The press hasn't made much of Saddam's 500-ton uranium stockpile, downplaying the story to such an extent that most Americans aren't even aware of it.
But it's been reported - albeit in a by-the-way fashion - by the New York Times and a handful of other media outlets. And one of Saddam's nuclear scientists, Jaffar Dhia Jaffar, admitted to the BBC earlier this year, "We had 500 tons of yellow cake [uranium] in Baghdad."
Surely 500 tons of anything qualifies as a "stockpile." And press reports going back more than a decade give no indication that weapons inspectors had any idea the Iraqi dictator had amassed such a staggering amount of nuke fuel until the U.S. invaded.
That's when the International Atomic Energy Agency was finally able to take a full inventory, and suddenly the 500-ton figure emerged.
Still, experts say Saddam's massive uranium stockpile was largely benign.
Largely? Well, except for the 1.8 tons of uranium that Saddam had begun to enrich. The U.S. Energy Department considered that stockpile so dangerous that it mounted an unprecedented airlift operation four months ago to remove the enriched uranium stash from al Tuwaitha.
But didn't most of that enrichment take place before the first Gulf War - with no indication whatsoever that Saddam was capable of proceeding any further toward his dream of acquiring the bomb?
That seems to be the consensus. But there's also disturbing evidence to the contrary.
David Kay, the former chief U.S. weapons inspector who was hailed by the press last year for pronouncing Iraq WMD-free, shared some interesting observations with Congress this past January about goings-on at al Tuwaitha in 2000 and 2001.
"[The Iraqis] started building new buildings, renovating it, hiring some new staff and bringing them together," Kay said. "And they ran a few physics experiments, re-ran experiments they'd actually run in the '80s."
"Fortunately, from my point of view," he added, "Operation Iraqi Freedom intervened and we don't know how or how fast that would have gone ahead. ... Given their history, it was certainly an emerging program that I would not have looked forward to their continuing to pursue."
Yes, indeed. Five-hundred tons is indeed quite a stockpile. The desert is large and the sands are deep. If buried jets and bunkers have been found weapons can yet be found either in Iraq or in surrounding "countries" that support Islamofacism.
Make that Islamofascism.
I'll state again,the U.N. was the one that boasted they're efforts were working since they just needed to prove the near 7000 un-accounted
missiles or warheads had been destroyed or junked.
The U.N. and Saddam are to blame for creating these conditions that lead to a single solution
of disarm or invade,Saddam had a history long befor the current President was in power so lets put the blame where it belongs.
This is also the 3rd War that Americans have died in while protecting Muslims,next war,let them die for THEIR freedom and Allah can sort out the "True" Muslims.
NO ISLAM - KNOW PEACE
There were things David Kay said in his "parting" speech that, naturally, didn't get wide media coverage. Unfortunately, memory is failing a bit at present. One thing I do recall related to the intelligence that led Bush and Blair to invade in March 2003. Kay said that there was a lot of contradictory information -- scientists assuring the UN searchers there was nothing, and, at the same time, scientists taking money from Saddam "under the table" and assuring him that they were building him the toxic toys he wanted.
Kind of reminiscent of the closing scene of a Roman Polanski movie, Chinatown, made back in the 70s starring Jack Nicholson as a San Franscisco detective. He's become emotionally involved and wants to take action to stop a character played by John Huston from committing incest with the child born of his incestuous relationship with his own daughter, played by Faye Dunaway.
Nicholson's character is warned, "Don't go there Jake, it's Chinatown." alluding to the hopeless tangle of lies and subterfuge.
As for the broader media ever admitting that there was more than a "germ of truth" about Saddam and WMDs, not in the current climate. Maybe, years down the road, but not any time too soon.
I have a strong suspicion that one reason why the whole world thought Sodom Insane had WMD was because (a) he wanted them; (b) ordered his scientists to make them; (c) the Iraqi scientists got nervous when they realized they didn't have or couldn't get everything they needed; (d) the Iraqi scientists got nervous again when they thought of what kind of retaliation might be launched; (e) the Iraqi scientists got even more nervous because they knew what kind of Great Leader they had; (f) several someones in the Iraqi scientific community started talking to other countries' intelligence agencies (including France and Russia).
Of course now that there's internal trouble in Iraq, nobody is going to come forward to go down as the whistleblower of Iraq.
To epg: Yes Iraq had a stockpile, but was not a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. I hope you dont imply that Saddam was a dictator bent on doing what was good for Islamofascism. He was a dictator bent on doing what was good for Saddam.
To Kepha1: You are are not right when you say that the whole world thought Saddam had WMD.
Besides this uranium, the latest CIA report does not conclude that Saddam had no stockpiles; it merely concludes that after over 1600 interviews there is no evidence WMD exist in Iraq. It leaves open the possibility that WMD were transfered to another country and calls for further study of this issue. Also, somehow these 'intelligence' people come up the figure of a 5% chance (and how do they calculate this?) that WMD exist.
There remains the enigma; there are records of WMD unaccounted for. It is utterly unreasonable to assume Saddam destroyed these weapone, if they existed, or that records are wrong (Iraqis were very good record keepers). So, there are reasonable grounds for conflicting opinions: one should assume WMD exist, but no one seems to know about them (and could some just be lying?). The enigma should be admitted for what it is and we should remain worried. The media and people generally talking about 'no WMD' assume an attitude that is simply not a reasonable or responsible, even now.
this whole issue is a vast exercise in illogic. since saddam demonstrated possession by using w.m.d., one would conclude that the u.n., u.k., u.s.a., france, russia, and even arab countries were correct in their intelligence that w.m.d. exist. to jump on bush because they have not been found or accounted for is immature in the extreme. if, indeed, saddam used and destroyed all of his w.m.d. and allowed the world to believe he was armed and hostile, then he has been hoisted by his own petard