"BUSH LIED! PEOPLE D- WHAT? 500 WMDs?"
Over 500 Sarin and Mustard gas munitions have been recovered since we went into Iraq.
The problem with the Left's antiwar positions: no matter how righteously they make their arguments, buying them is hard when each of their foundational premises turns out to be so provably wrong, time after time.
My opinion? The same as it's been since several months after we went into Iraq in 2003: For diplomatic reasons, the Bush administration did not want to embarrass the three members of the UN security council -- France, Russia, and China -- who made and sold WMD precursors to Iraq, despite overwhelming evidence that they had done so (and in Russia's case, helped Saddam remove them to Syria/Lebanon in a sterile and safe manner that the Iraqis were incapable of carrying out without killing themselves). Bush sucked it up and took it on the chin, trading instant gratification and vindication for international polity -- at least publically, though I'm sure that given what actually, uh, happened, backroom talks went, ahem, in our favor.
So much of "history" is not known for 50 years or more after the events themselves happen, for just this reason....
posted by Annoynymous | 11:09 PM
6 Comments:
Funny how the DoD has backed off this, the Duelfer Report already listed and dismissed this, and these "wmd" found buried near the Iranian border appear to be forgotten shells from the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s, and "not the WMD over which we went to war," to quote the Pentagon. And sarin decomposes within a matter of months.
I'm sure Sen. Santorum appreciates your written contribution to his doomed re-election campaign, but I thought you were smarter than hyping this. Particularly since most of the right, including Allahpundit and Patterico, don't think this is much of anything.
Your "analysis" is in fact an EXACT copy of what Fox News Military Analyst Thomas McInerney said last night. They're listening to you! Or you to them. Or something.
dday wrote: -- Your "analysis" is in fact an EXACT copy of what Fox News Military Analyst Thomas McInerney said last night. They're listening to you! --
Like I said, it's what I've been saying since 2003. In the initial push into Baghdad, we came across scores of camouflaged bunkers containing WMD precursors, made in France, Russia, and China. Maybe the Fox analyst is making the same point because it's an accurate assessment. Have not seen what Allah and others are saying, will check.
You must be reading a different Allah and Patterico than me.
Allah is writing about how the NYT, Post, and LAT have instituted a media-blackout of the story, and wraps it up with this:
"Finding WMDs won’t change their anti-war disposition but it might make them scream and cry like a three-year-old whose favorite blanket was taken away. Reason enough to feel a little excitement, I suppose."
http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/06/22/media-blackout-on-wmd-story/
Ditto with Patterico:
http://patterico.com/2006/06/22/4754/la-times-prints-not-one-word-of-yesterdays-reports-that-chemical-weapons-were-found-in-iraq/
from February 2003:
"Last time I checked, it was 18 countries in NATO who have signed on with us -- including the ones closest to Iraq -- the only dissenters being countries that either a)have valuable oil contracts they might lose; b)are playing the game for political advantage with the masses at home; and/or c)are worried about us finding "Made in France" "Made in Germany" "Made in China" and "Made in Russia" stamped on the WMD materials we will invariably find. You want to see NATO split? Just wait until that happens. The EU will fall apart too. And the UN. Good riddance. The League of Nations ceased to be when it became irrelevant. So will the UN."
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=5619#c0010
Patterico: "As I said yesterday, I am still dubious about the significance of this story. The more I learn, the more it sounds like these are forgotten weapons from before the first war, that were unusable and didn’t pose a significant danger."
That's from YOUR link. AND, it's not contradicted by your Rummy quote. He very clearly equivocates, saying "had sarin," &c.
Do you read the things or just link to them?
furthermore...
Professor Bainbridge: "There's nothing new here to suggest that Iraq had a WMD program sufficiently threatening to justify the war."
Pwerline, in a moment of clarity: "what they're talking about is old munitions left over from, presumably, before the first Gulf War. This doesn't appear to constitute evidence that Saddam's regime had continued to manufacture chemical weapons in more recent years."
And: "The U.S. military announced in 2004 in Iraq that several crates of the old shells had been uncovered and that they contained a blister agent that was no longer active. Neither the military nor the White House nor the CIA considered the shells to be evidence of what was alleged by the Bush administration to be a current Iraqi program to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons."
You're damaging any shred of credibility by continuing to push this completely bogus release by a guy whose election campaign is in trouble.
Post a Comment
<< Home