Hans Blix Criticizes Bush And Blair....

[Bushmustgo]

On the issue of WMD, Bush and Blair have asked the public to be more patient in order for us to find the WMD.

That's sounds great but, who led rushed us to war because someone didn't have patience for the U.N. in their efforts to locate the WMD....

Tables have turned, we could have left the U.N. in there and no war would have ever occured, $200 billion in American tax paying money could be used for us at HOME, 300+ American troops would still be alive, etc.

Are you also aware that the Iraqi Oil for Food program paid the $80million dollar price tag to keep U.N. Weapons inspectors in Iraq................

This administration has screwed the U.S. and its tax paying citizens pretty good.........

[FastNed]

Oh yes, the Toothless Tiger, the UN, with just a 'few more' months would have achieved what it did not in twelve years - ended Saddam's frantic attempts to gain WMD with which to threaten America.

You predicate your opinion on 'no war would have occured' on a dubious foundation, that the status quo would have continued and Saddam and various terrorists groups he assisted would have made no attempts against America. That is doubtful.

But it doesn't matter. Clear warning was given to the World, to Saddam and his ilk after 9.11 - get out of the terrorism business or pay the price. He didn't bother to listen, pity that! America has given adequate notice of its post 9.11 intentions.

Leave no live enemy behind!

[Craig Read]

Blix is a clown.

He himself said previously many times that Iraq had WMD, was trying to reconstitute its nuclear programs and that Hussein's regime was not cooperative in demonstrating to any extent that Iraq wanted to end WMD program building.

So he should shut up and watch the big boys do his job for him.

As Bush and others stated 6 months would be necessary to find WMD and hard evidence. We are only at the end of month 5. Hussein had 6 months to either destroy or hide or sale, or export WMD before the US invaded.

The main question is not if WMD existed before the war - all parties including the Useless Nattering Org agreed that Iraq possessed WMD. The main concern is 'where is it now ?' Hopefully not in the hands of Al Qaeda.

[Luigi71585]

Although I am totally for peace, one point seems to be missing from this discussion. This is the fact that now our inspectors have virtually free-reign of the country. When they go to inspect a bunker, they know that whatever was in there last week will still be there. Now we are no longer trying to stay one step ahead of Saddams "missle movers." Whether or not war was the way to get there, its what we have now. Lets see how it turns out.

[Craig Read]

Blix and his supporters are clowns.

He himself said previously many times that Iraq had WMD, was trying to reconstitute its nuclear programs and that Hussein's regime was not cooperative in demonstrating to any extent that Iraq wanted to end WMD program building.

So he should shut up and watch the big boys do his job for him.

As Bush and others stated 6 months would be necessary to find WMD and hard evidence. We are only at the end of month 5. Hussein had 6 months to either destroy or hide or sale, or export WMD before the US invaded.

The main question is not if WMD existed before the war - all parties including the Useless Nattering Org agreed that Iraq possessed WMD. The main concern is 'where is it now ?' Hopefully not in the hands of Al Qaeda

[Bushmustgo]

La-la Land Craig,

It's funny how you think Hans Blix is a clown when he could not find WMD but, now that Bush and Co. cannot find them, they are not clowns????

You talk a lot out of your butt and evidently have no facts or knowledge of what's going on. Blix has mentioned several times that he had believed the WMD were destroyed 10yrs ago but, Saddam made the world think he still had them as a deterent for the U.S. to invade.........a defense mechanism.......

Who's the clown now Craig? I'll give you a hint, his name starts with the letter "C."

[SirRiff]

if you still think it was all about WMD, and the UN was wrong but Bush was right, you just might be clinically insane.

SirRiff

[Whistler]

I am having a little trouble understanding why people don’t understand that Saddam destroyed his chem. / bio weapons without providing documentation in an attempt to have the “war mongering Bush Administration” look like fools in front of the world again. He might not have destroyed it all and we might actually find some but rest assured he did have them.

Saddam was so cock sure world / UN opinion would hold the President at bay that he never made the first defensive plan to protect himself of the party.

[KrustyKidd]

Blix has mentioned several times that he had believed the WMD were destroyed 10yrs ago

And his job was to find them or verify that they had been destroyed. He did not. Saddam did not prove that the WMD material he posessed in the nineties was destroyed and hampered all attempts at inspections. He played a little game and lost his gulag.

Maybe Blix believed in the tooth fairy too but facts are facts and there was no evidence of the WMD known to exist before had been destroyed. No orders for nulifying agent, no transport requisitions, no rations for the thousands of troops, no holes in the ground to inspect. Nothing. So smart guy, the key question is what has happened to the WMD? With a moniker like Bushmustgo you have got to have an inside track here. Where should they start digging to find the destroyed Chemicals and Biological agents? What office should they search and in which drawer are the documents that prove they have been shipped to third parties unknown to us? They were there and are either there still, destroyed or someplace else now so where are they or what happened to them?

A defense mechanism. LOL. Reaching pal, still, where are they? La la land I suppose is your answer?

[Nuclear]

We will find WMD....we've been a bit busy keeping the restless natives out of trouble...they're not exactly making it easy. When we do find WMD, we'll have proven the uselessness of the UN.

[nova_satori]

march

april

may

june

july

august

septiember

Do I count 7 months?

We will find WMD....we've been a bit busy keeping the restless natives out of trouble...they're not exactly making it easy. When we do find WMD, we'll have proven the uselessness of the UN.

Right...because he built them with the infrasture he didn't have. With the labs no one in the bush admin can even agree to that they were labs. He used centrigues totally useless for enrichement....lol Right. Sure we'll find WMD, when hell freezes over, when pigs fly out of my butt, or when the government finally fabricates something. They're late. They call themselves goverment yet they haven't fabricated. They should be ashmed.

[Hugo]

Some key points here:

1) Mix bleach with ammonia and you can create chlorine or phosgene gas, both of which are potentially fatal chemical warfare agents, used in WWI and other conflicts for military purposes. What "infrastructure" did Saddam lack - household cleaning products?

2) Saddam had WMD at some stage, since he used them against Iranians and Kurds. I'm sure he did not deplete his entire stockpile, men like him plan ahead and it would be sensible to make more. Where are they now? They have to be somewhere. If he hid them, sold them, gave them away, they are somewhere, and he had them at some point.

3) Saddam had numerous embargoes against his country, which were impoverishing it. If he'd had them lifted, he could have had greatly increased trade, sold his oil for guns and tanks (which is what he really wants), and greatly improved those parts of his country he cares about, not to mention his finances. All he had to do was prove that he had no WMD. But he did not, for 12 years. Why?

[Whistler]

All he had to do was prove that he had no WMD. But he did not, for 12 years. Why?

So the inspectors would not find them and make President Bush look like a warmonger harassing poor little Iraq. Moreover, UN nations would kindly lift scansions.

[Craig Read]

WMD will be found. David McKay leading the inspections has already stated he is compiling the evidence. We should await his report. Keep in mind 100 tonnes of WMD sounds like a lot. It is not - you can hide this in 10 large holes.

[KrustyKidd]

WMD will be found. David McKay leading the inspections has already stated he is compiling the evidence. We should await his report. Keep in mind 100 tonnes of WMD sounds like a lot. It is not - you can hide this in 10 large holes.

This amount would easily fit into two semi trailers if configured properly. To drive around with it would not be good for the suspension, roads or tires but just trying to help put the amount into perspective.

[nova_satori]

Before we go ANYWHERE, what is your definition of a weapon of mass destruction?

Mine is a nuclear warhead, or millions of gallons of bio/chem agents packed into shells.

Mix bleach with ammonia and you can create chlorine or phosgene gas, both of which are potentially fatal chemical warfare agents, used in WWI and other conflicts for military purposes. What "infrastructure" did Saddam lack - household cleaning products?

That's not a nuke. Nor did they have a ability to deliver it on a large scale.

2) Saddam had WMD at some stage, since he used them against Iranians and Kurds. I'm sure he did not deplete his entire stockpile, men like him plan ahead and it would be sensible to make more. Where are they now? They have to be somewhere. If he hid them, sold them, gave them away, they are somewhere, and he had them at some point.

Not past 1999. Yes, he had them, at one time. Did he have them past 2000? Highly doubtful. If he had them during the war, facing sheer destruction, why weren't they used? Why weren't they launched from artillery like the Bush admin stated they could be?

Saddam had numerous embargoes against his country, which were impoverishing it. If he'd had them lifted, he could have had greatly increased trade, sold his oil for guns and tanks (which is what he really wants), and greatly improved those parts of his country he cares about, not to mention his finances. All he had to do was prove that he had no WMD. But he did not, for 12 years. Why?

For the same reason he let on he had WMD during a certain period. The Islamic world is highly factionalized. Many of them hate each other, and war is often at the top of the list of things to do. Would you go to war aganist someone who supposively had large amounts of weapons that could wipe out divisons in a split second. The numerous embargos didn't stop the trade of weapons into Iraq. it stopped SOME, but many guns, tanks and ordance found its way into the arsenals of the Iraqi army. besides, like Castro, the best way to move the blame for bad management is to say that it was the fault of the West. Removing those saunctions, you got no one to blame for your management failures except for yourself.

[Hugo]

Mine is a nuclear warhead, or millions of gallons of bio/chem agents packed into shells.

Then your definition is wrong. The chemical weapons I described would be illegal under the Geneva Convention, and the UN itself includes chemical and biological weapons as WMD.

That's not a nuke. Nor did they have a ability to deliver it on a large scale.

Doesn't matter. It's still against the Geneva Convention and the UN would define such chemicals as WMD if their inspectors found them.

If he had them during the war, facing sheer destruction, why weren't they used?

Because he was facing certain military defeat whether he used WMD or not. To use WMD might have very briefly slowed the Coalition advance, but that's all. Saddam's only hope was playing the victim card and hoping that there were enough saps like you in the international community to force a Coalition withdrawal, and the minute he used WMD he would have thrown that card out of the window and rendered his situation utterly hopeless.

Removing those saunctions, you got no one to blame for your management failures except for yourself.

It didn't seem to adversely affect his regime before the sanctions, now, did it?

Would you go to war aganist someone who supposively had large amounts of weapons that could wipe out divisons in a split second.

As the Coalition did in both Gulf Wars?

[FastNed]

It is long standing American Policy that any use of any WMD against America will justify American response with WMD. In simple terms, use of chemical or Bio weapons against American Forces on a dash for Baghdad could well result in an American Proctologist inserting a six foot long, nuke tiped probe painfully into your posterior. Any American response will be nuclear as we destroyed all other Chem & Bio weapons in compliance with International Treaties sponsored by America.

The policy was designed to discourage direct attacks as well as proxy attacks, i.e., if No. Korea provides a Nuke (or any CBR weapon) to a terrorist group working out of Damascus, both NK and Syria are at risk from an American WMD response.

Saddam had two real problems in authorizing such an attack: first, you must consider his culture and what was important to him: he is/was an Al Tikritti, a man of clan and tribe. Any American response would have been directed first and foremost at Tikrit destroying his family and clan. Would you expect him to be 'impressed' or 'deterred' by an response against the Kurds or Shi'ia? Second, the environmental conditions during our attack were counter-productive for a chemical or Bio attack; had he used such agents, the extreme heat and sandstorms would have negated much if not all effectiveness of an attack. American troops and equipment function quite well during harsh Iraqi Summers and brutal Afghan Winters - did you really believe the Media reports?

The failure, to date, to locate Saddams WMD production facilities is an extremely serious problem - and I do not mean the Media PR aspects! A serious bioweapons production facility can be constructed in a tractor/trailor truck; add seed stock (which has been established to be in Iraq) and you have the basis for a real nightmare. Any half-assed military advisor could design a "resistance" program based upon this. I am self-censoring and will go no further into this - DO NOT attempt to play with or research this concept, at home, school or college; it is counter-productive to your well being and could well bring you to the attention of some hard nosed people you would rather not know you exist!

A political comment: if any additional evidence was needed that the Democratic Candidates for President are "Clueless" on National Defense and are not to be trusted in this area by the majority of Americans, this is it. They are all chanting the mantra of the rabid Left - "There are no WMD" rather than discussing the clear and present danger to every American which flows from our failure to locate and destroy Saddams stash.