With ISIS closing in on
Baghdad news reports
stated that ISIS forces were closing in on an Iraqi WMD facility. Obviously
this raises many concerns about how terrorists would use these weapons.
But we have been told for years by the media and liberals that Saddam did not
have WMD, which obviously undermines Bush's reason for invading Iraq in 2003.
Liberals and the media have argued that Bush lied, destroying the neo-con
rationale for the invasion.
But now we hear that
there was a WMD facility of some kind so did Saddam have WMD or not? Obviously he used something to kill Kurds. A Frontline
PBS (liberal) report indicated that Saddam did have some kind of WMD
program which was more than just a plan or a few buildings.
CNN
has an interesting timeline which indicates that in 2002 Iraq submitted a
12,000 page (!) report on its WMD programs.
And in January 2003 some WMD warheads are discovered, but they are
largely empty (but could presumably be filled with agents). In February Secretary of State Collin Powell gave
his speech to the UN saying that Iraq lied to UN inspectors. By March the US has invaded. CIA
director George Tennant said, regarding Iraqi WMD, that it was a “slam
dunk.”
Hot
Air (conservative) argued in 2010 that WikiLeaks proves the US found WMD in
Iraq. But the Guardian (liberal)
in 2004 stated that UN and US inspectors found no credible program.
In 2012 Time
(liberal) reported on the CIA’s
confession that it was “bamboozled” when it reported Saddam had WMD.
Commentary
(conservative) argues that the weapons ISIS finds will not be usable, but
reflects on how the weapons could have been used if Iraq had not been invaded.
What does all of this mean? It would appear that Saddam Hussein did not
have a massive delivery capability for WMD, but he did have something and may
have been working on building more.
Whether Bush should have invaded can still be debated, but the media
myth that there was no WMD is not supported by the evidence. However, it would not appear to be a massive
buildup of WMD that could be used to justify the US invasion of Iraq.
7/12/14 UPDATE. From Wired: "WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq -- With Surprising Results."
By late 2003, even the Bush White House’s staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
But WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction.
An initial glance at the WikiLeaks war logs doesn’t reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the Saddam Hussein regime — the Bush administration’s most (in)famous rationale for invading Iraq. But chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.
No comments:
Post a Comment