by Eric DonderoEarly in the War, in 2003, two US Soldiers were hospitalized for burns suffered while handling sarin and mustard gas laced weaponry on the battlefield. Additionally that same year, weapons inspector teams uncovered plans for Hussein's WMD program burried in the rose garden of one of Saddam's top weapons scientists. In 2004, Polish Soldiers uncovered a number of missiles in an abandoned warehouse, and a year after that, US Soldiers found 500 additional sarin and mustard gas laced missiles in another warehouse.
Both stories were mentioned by the media in passing, and largely written off as "old weaponry too old for active use."
Predictably, the Anti-War wing of the libertarian movement echoed the explanations of the liberal media. On libertarian blog after blog, when confronted with the stories, Anti-war Libertarians just shrugged, and when the news died down, they went on with their rants: "Where's the WMD? Bush said the reason we invaded Iraq was WMD. So, where's the WMD?"
Now this from the AP:
The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program - a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium - [emphasis added] reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.Another weapon has fallen off the shelf in the arsenal of the Anti-War wing of the libertarian movement. For years, they shouted to Pro-War on Islamo-Fascism libertarians "Where's the WMD, where's the WMD?" Now, that it has been found conclusively, actually for at least the 5th time now, there's dead silence from the Anti-War camp.
The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" _ the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment _ was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions.
What's now left is the final and complicated push to clean up the remaining radioactive debris at the former Tuwaitha nuclear complex about 12 miles south of Baghdad _ using teams that include Iraqi experts recently trained in the Chernobyl fallout zone in Ukraine.
Now, look for the Anti-Warists to pick up the rant again in a few weeks or months: "Bush lied... there was never any WMD." Problem for them, this time Pro-Defense Libertarians will be watching.
21 comments:
Easy to answer this one: Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld are on record to admit no WMD were found. Ha ha, so the pro-offense "libertarians" have some explaining to do.
Those "WMD" seem so old indeed. What about all the WMD that countries like Pakistan, India, Israel etc. etc. have, real WMD: Nukes? Should those countries not be attacked pro-offense "libertarians"?
Easy to answer this one:
Bush, Cheney, and the whole crew have been beaten down so badly by the ultra-liberal media on the WMD issue, that they don't even want to attempt to answer back. They've become essentially BIGASS WIMPS.
Hell, Bush doesn't even use the term Islamo-Fascism any more. And the State Dept. has put out a directive telling employees not to use any terms that might offend Muslims.
What kind of bullshit is that???
Bush was right all along about WMD. But that doesn't change the fact, that he himself has become a bit of a War Wimp, and almost a liberal himself.
Can't blame him, he's been attacked so savagely by the Left. But it doesn't change the fact, that he's getting real, real wimpy as of late, particularly when it comes to fighting back against the media.
Had bush bowed down to Saddam, the inspection process would've ended and he already had in place the scientist and means to create them in short time. and he most certainly would have......the man claimed up till the very end he had WMD to the world, which went along with the CIA, British, Russian, Israeli, etc. intelligence on the matter.
Check out the 1992 Al Gore, criticing the first Bush for not taking out Saddam and leaving him in Power...and citing all the Terrorist connections back then Saddam had.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64
the left would've been calling Bush "Derlect in Duty" the last 6 years had we not removed a Islamic Terror Sponsor State/Regime.
That said, WMD was not the sole reason for the war...there were over 20 of them debated on and WMD wasn't even at the top of the list. It was the issue that all sides in the govt. could agree on.
You are sooooo right Jonathan. Can you imagine what would have happened if we hadn't gone to War with Saddam?
The Left, particularly the Liberal Media would have savaged Bush, called him a "Wimp like his Dad."
I bet we would have seen stories like: "Yeah Bush could take out the tiny little Taliban Army, but he still left Saddam Hussein in power: The Story of a Failed Presidency."
Bush's biggest problem is that he has an 'R' by his name. Thus, whatever he does, he's screwed. the bigotry by the Liberal Media in this country towards Republicans is of gigantic proportions.
in hindsight, the public speeches should've focused more on Saddams history and Acts of War against us, his known terrorist financing and connections and the fact we couldn't allow a regime like this any longer to continue to thumb its nose at us. Then mention the WMD issue...as far as emphasis in the speeches. i.e. the PR side of this.
the WMD issue is where the "pre-emption" issue gets so confused. we were right to take Saddam out regardless of WMD, what they meant by "pre-emptive" was to keep the man from giving dirty bombs or worse to these Fruitcakes who don't wear uniforms and gives Regimes such as this plausible deniability. i.e., pre-empt this from happening. Which is beside the point on being on "just war" or not in Saddams case.
I was reading up some on Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Wars. When the Tripolian nations cut down our flag....we viewed that as an "Act of War" and Jefferson ordered the war to start on them. "From the Shores of Tripoli..."
pathetic how things have changed.
"libertarians" have alot of nerve and/or ignorance in citing the founders in making their arguments against this stuff. the Alien and Seditions acts are another fun one, as are all the alliances that George Washington's regime was engaged in at the time of his farewell speech and the fact that Hamilton wrote the speech as a direct POLITICAL attack on Jefferson. Because Jefferson wanted to ally with France(who he loved), which would've been a horrible alliance...and the one they clearly were focusing on and against.
Ha ha indeed stefan.
If you read the Congressional decelration of war for Iraq in 2003
http://www.whitehouse.gov/
news/releases/2002/10/
20021002-2.html
You will see that WMD's was a minor issue, the major case for war was Iraq's violations of the UN ceasefire from 1991 and it's attempts to prevent the international community from monitoring the country.
By the way, if Bush "lied" about Iraq having WMDs', so did British, French, Jordanian, Syrian, Russian and German intelligence agencies as well because they all said the same thing the CIA believed, Iraq had WMD's
The "opening" of the unlawful Iraq invasion was already established by Clinton in 1998 indeed. I am well aware of Gore's statement earlier. Are you aware of Cheney AND McCain's statement in the 1990's? McCain advocated a retreat from North Africa ASAP and criticized nation-building.
Saddan Hussein war never threatening the US and the oil transport to the US was safe. If that would have been the reason, why not attack Venezuela also?
George Bush & Cheney need not be impeached, they need to be in prison, from next year.
http://www.prosecutionofbush.com/audio.php
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-bugliosi/the-prosecution-of-george_b_102427.html
Leftwing CBS newsreporter Lara Logan, who was reporting from Afghanistan and Iraq and critisized the war and the situation, such a total hypocrite. She became preganant with a married man, e.g. causing him to divorce and she will marry him in the future. No morals whatsoever. The further irony is this guy -
Joe Burkett - is a state department contractor, e.g. the people that profit so much from the war and oil.
The whole liberal MSM was in favor of the war all. along. This fact should come as an eye opener.
Frankly, I have more respect for your guys than for her. I am also especially enraged about her behavior (also that of a certain actress), as she is from the same country as me. Obviously my political views on our country differ very much from hers as well.
Ilana Mercer on the other side - also from the same country as me - has turned out on the right side again.
kookville returns.
ah, from the guy who supports the Joke of the election...Ron paul. Who ignorantly claims the Iraq War is Unconstitional when in fact is follwed the Constitution and precedent to a T...i.e. "formal declaration of war" and "informal Declarations of war" are both consistent with the declare war clause....
of course Paul voted for the 2001 AUMF Afghanistan is fought under, less detailed the the Iraq version. to take out the Taliban who didn't technically attck us.
funny how the Afghanistan War doesn't get called 'unconstitutional" by the cranks....though paul does engage in Conspiracy mongering over it now.
Fools, as simple as that...Useful Idiots is also an accurate term, idiots for the absolute worse type of Evil on the planet today.
http://husseinandterror.com
stefan wrote,
"George Bush & Cheney need not be impeached, they need to be in prison, from next year."
Then Bill Clinton and Al Gore need to follow them into a jail cell also stefan along with the 98 US Senators who vote "yes" to the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 which mandated a regime-change in Iraq.
Bush was still a provenial governor of Texas in 1998 and Chaney was still a private citizen.
All the foregoing aside, the Tuwaitha nuclear materials have been known about since prior to 1991, accounted for after the Gulf War, monitored on a yearly basis by the IAEI until 2002, seized and again inventoried in May 2003, and turned back over to the Iraqi govt. in October 2003.
This is not news, and the materials at Tuwaitha were neither weapons grade nor prepared for conversion to weapons grade.
So the allegation that the Tuwaitha materials are evidence of the existence of WMDs is so much bunk.
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2008/07/tuwiatha-yellowcake-or-manufacturing.htm
yeah, these were in a UN lockbox or something...but what would've happened after the inspection process had ended?
yeah, these were in a UN lockbox or something...but what would've happened after the inspection process had ended?
anonymous
"What would have happened if the UN inspection process had ended?"
Most (about 90%) of this stuff is so low-grade that the Iraqi government had to shop it out for two years before they could find a buyer for it, even for regular nuclear fuel usage. Why? Because it will have to be significantly upgraded into regular nuke fuel, and would take--even in Canada or the US--at least 2 years of intensive work to upgrade to fissile material.
Suggesting that this constituted enough of a WMD threat to justify anything is like suggesting that because Iraq had a fertilizer plant it was producing chemical weapons since the plant was capable of producing crude nitrates that are a precursor to a precursor of certain chemical weapons.
Here is the problem: people who ask those "what if" questions and nod ominously usually confuse the act of asking questions with the act of providing actual evidence.
There is no evidence--nor did the Bush administration ever claim there was--that the Tuwaitha nuclear fuel dump has EVER (even by Dick Cheney) been considered a WMD threat. And if Bush/Cheney didn't consider it a threat, then what is the source of your paranoia?
Mr. Newton,
The matter of WMD's was not the sole primary reasn why mnay libertarians supported the Iraq war, and continue to do so to this very day.
Speaking for myself, I supported the endeavour based upon the natural rights of the Iraqis being violated.
The Iraqi Regime had continuously vilated the Gulf War Peace Treaty, by firing upon U.S. and British jets in the No-Fly Zone, and by denying weapons inspectors free and unfettered access to the country. The regime was also dispatching funding to Palestinians to engage in suicide bombings in Israel, and was harboring one of the terrorists responsible for the Achille Lauro terrorist highjacking.
The Hussein Regime constituted a threat to America, its interests, and our allies.
The WMD issue was never the sole issue for myself in supporting the effort. Therefore, I was not as furious as some when that specific element did not come to fruition. The Administration over emphasized the WMD issue and failed to address the other threats.
ryan
I appreciate your point and I don't necessarily disagree; I am only making the point that this particular WMD claim made in the post about the Tuwaitha nuke dump being evidence of WMDs is bunk.
That's all--and it is surprising that nobody cares to deal with the reality that there was no factual basis for the original post.
Good Job! :)
Tony says:
"Good job:)!"
I assume you're talking about the U.S. victory in Iraq, right?
It is not my responsibility to defend an article written by another individual. Hussein used WMD's against the Kurds, therfore he had developed weapons of mass destruction. All of those Kurdish babies and women died from WMD's released by the Hussein regime.
Post a Comment