# Iraq: What's the Evidence? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 7, 2002, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411 "2002-09-07T07:49:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/1 "2002-09-07T07:49:35Z")
Okay, forgive me if this has been done before. We all “know” Saddam’s a bad guy, we “know” what he’d like to do, but what’s the current evidence against him? Do we have sat photos showing things that look suspicious, spy reports, or is it just a vague general feeling that we need to take him out? ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/2 "2002-09-07T09:36:46Z")
The same topic has several threads active in GD. . . . [Has Iraq ever done anything to the USA?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134365) [Does Tony Blair know something we don’t?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134264) [War against Iraq – inevitable?!](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=132541) [The Emperors (new) Gulf War clothes](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134093) Do we really need another thread in GQ? ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 9:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/3 "2002-09-07T09:42:35Z")
Well, most of those seem to be filled with opinions. I was kind of hoping that there might be some hard documentation available. ---
**Author:** ![flyboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/4da419/32.png) [@flyboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flyboy)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/4 "2002-09-07T12:11:36Z")
I don’t think anything has been released intel-wise. I’ve seen hints in the media that there is some hard evidence (from anonymous insiders), but I don’t have much faith that there is. I think the administration would be pushing it hard if it really existed, even if it meant compromising the source. Hopefully, we’ll find out for sure on the 11/12th when Bush starts talking. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/5 "2002-09-07T12:56:19Z")
Well, FWIW. [http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/07/31/senate.iraq.hearing/](http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/07/31/senate.iraq.hearing/) > [@](#): > > Defector: Iraq could have nukes by 2005 > August 1, 2002 Posted: 4:49 AM EDT (0849 GMT) > > WASHINGTON (CNN) – A former Iraqi nuclear engineer told a Senate hearing Wednesday that the country could have nuclear weapons by 2005. > > Khidir Hamza, who defected from Iraq in 1994, and other experts on Iraq testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at the start of two days of hearings on the Iraqi threat to the United States and possible U.S. responses – including a military attack. > > Citing German intelligence estimates, Hamza said Iraq had more than 10 tons of uranium and one ton of slightly enriched uranium. Hamza said that could give Iraq enough weapons-grade uranium to build three nuclear weapons within three years. > > In addition, Hamza said, Iraq is trying to extend the range of its missiles in order to reach Israel. So we’re talking “intelligence estimates”, whatever they base those on. And–W seems to feel the burden of proof is on Saddam to prove that he’s _not_ developing WOMD. [http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/conflict/bushsada.htm](http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/conflict/bushsada.htm) > [@](#): > > 26 November 2001 > > Bush Warns Saddam Hussein to Permit International Inspectors Back In > > Bush Remarks Restate Longstanding U.S. policy, Fleischer Says > > by Wendy S. Ross > Washington File White House Correspondent > > Washington - Iraq’s Saddam Hussein will “find out” the consequences if he does not permit international inspectors back into Iraq in order to prove to the world that he’s not developing weapons of mass destruction, President Bush says. Note that this was last November. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/6 "2002-09-07T13:00:18Z")
Satellite photos show that Saddam has been building [cropdusters](http://www.iht.com/articles/69836.html) and [doing construction work](http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;%24sessionid%24HHP3LROBMUHOXQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2002/09/07/wirq107.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/09/07/ixnewstop.html) at his bombed-out nuclear facilities. The nuke plant pictures at least are popping up on news sites. There’s much speculation as to what meaning should be attached to the photos. According to the CIA, Iraq has not reneged on its commitment to the [nuclear test ban treaty](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html). > [@](#): > > \*\*Sailor \*\*asks: Do we really need another thread in GQ? Of course we do, the threads in GD all suffer from wild speculation as to what the facts _mean_. That tends to obscure what the facts _are_. ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/7 "2002-09-07T13:02:02Z")
[Here](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44855-2002Sep6.html) is an article from yesterday’s _Washington Post_ regarding satellite photos which could reveal “suspicious” activity. [Here](http://www.space.com/news/iraq_satellite_020904.html) is an article at [Space.com](http://Space.com) which shows some of those photos and discusses what might be going on in them. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/8 "2002-09-07T13:13:59Z")
The photos from [Space.com](http://Space.com), and apparently all the other ones that appeared in the last few days, seem to come from [this 1999 State Department report](http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/iraq99.htm). Has anyone seen more current images ? ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/9 "2002-09-07T19:58:39Z")
The evidence against Iraq is discussed here. Bottom line–it’s ambiguous. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle\_east/2239536.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2239536.stm) > [@](#): > > Friday, 6 September, 2002, 09:03 GMT 10:03 UK > Analysis: Is Iraq rearming? > > By Paul Reynolds > BBC News Online world affairs correspondent > > The British Government is preparing its dossier outlining Iraq’s efforts to rebuild its weapons of mass destruction. > > Other published information is ambiguous about the extent to which Iraq has managed to overcome years of sanctions and destruction by UN weapons inspectors. > > But, according to most assessments, there is no doubt that it is trying. > > From a variety of sources, these are the general assessments of the state of play… [more] ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2002, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/10 "2002-09-07T22:23:50Z")
Iraq was completing its nuclear armament when Israel knocked them out in 1981. It then set in rebuilding them and were about finished, when we attacked them in 1991. 10-year period for them to reestablish its nuclear delivery capabilities? If so, it has already done so or is about to do so again. Germ warfare against the Kurds and others by Iraq has been well documented. There is no doubt it has these means of mass destruction. Other countries have them too, but other countries did not agree to inspections to make sure they don’t have them. Iraq, as part of the truce, agreed to such inspections, but has reneged. Thus, its right to maintain the truce was forfeited. The last time a country aqreed with international authority to refrain from doing something was Germany after WWI. Hitler just ignored the promises made, and we all know the consequences of that when the international community looked the other way.☹ ---
**Author:** ![johnson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@johnson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/johnson)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2002, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/11 "2002-09-08T01:10:38Z")
Try [this one](http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?020325fa_FACT1) first. Then, just for kicks, read [this](http://www.tnr.com/092401/woolsey092401.html). Haven’t seen any follow-up on that one… ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2002, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-whats-the-evidence/127411/12 "2002-09-11T16:29:07Z")
> [@](#): > > Duc Duck Goose said: The evidence against Iraq is discussed here. Bottom line–it’s ambiguous. The evidence is also all a couple years out of date because the administration has not seen fit to put together a new intelligence assessment: [U.S. Lacks Up-to-Date Review of Iraqi Arms](http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/11/international/middleeast/11IRAQ.html) :smack: :eek: 😕 :rolleyes: :mad: -or some such.