Well if the administrations best evidence is disputed by its best analysts, isnt it time for Bush to either stop pretending he’s already found WMD or get independant confirmation?
Their are no WMD, which was obvious from the start. Shrub’s problem is to convince people to stop asking questions about WMD and start focusing on something else, like a war with Syria or Iran.
The article says that at least 3 independent groups have checked the trailers. 2 1/2 of the groups said they were biological weapons labw, while half of one disagreed. I guess there’s no way for us to be certain. I would give more weight to the dissenters’ opinion if they were named, rather than anonymous.
There not independant groups their Intellegence analysts in the pay of the US goverenment. Anonymity avoids messy hatchet jobs ala Daniel Ellesburg. The governemnt hasn’t denied the claims and they should no if they were just made up.
Xenomorph:
[quote]
Their are no WMD, which was obvious from the start.*
I differ with your opinion. Although I was totally opposed to the war, I was surprised when no WMD were found.
George Bush does remind me of a child who still believes that denying the truth will change the truth. The more he talks about the subject, the more foolish he looks. He shouldn’t try to convince us that a mobile lab that shows no signs of being used to make weapons actually is a weapon. I expect him to say next that it was a weapon because it could be used to run down soldiers. Or maybe it would be catapulted over a hill.
If he had bad intelligence information, he needs to get rid of Rumsfield and Cheney. If he knowingly lied about the reasons for war, he should be removed from office. The problem is that that would make Cheney President.
I would like to add that I am not terribly fond of the spineless Democrats in Congress who abdicated their responsibility and allowed a trigger happy administration to run wild.
The simple fact is, nobody has put forth a plausible alternative explanation.
Weather balloons? It’s a pretty silly explanation…
Anyway, the UN had 11 years, without other tasks to deal with. We’ve already uncovered things they’ve missed. I’d say to give it a few months…
That would not constitue evidence in itself, even if one were to admit this fact. Your argument is the equivalent of ‘no one knows how the universe started, so God did it’. Lets not forget the former Iraqi administartion is in tatters and fleeing for their lives they are hardly in a position to explain what the hardware was for.
If they even know. If these are big whoopity dangerous things, they might know. If they don’t amount to much, they might not even be aware of thier existence.
TMW-- Granted, it’s not proof in and of itself. I reject your metaphor, however. It’s more like, “We found this pipe in a crack addict’s home. It could be used for cracking walnuts though.”. It’s not enough evidence in and of itself, but it’s a start.
The President has actually said that we found “weapons”
http://www.suntimes.com/output/iraq/cst-nws-iraq01s1.html
He probably meant “evidence of weapons” because he immediately refers to the two trailers, so I can forgive that little spin. But then he says against that they’ve found manufacturing equipment (I assume he meant the trailers) AND weapons, putting them in separate categories. But so far, they have not announced finding any weapons.
My guess is hydrogen-production facilities for short-ranged rockets.
And, as noted elsewhere in Great Debates, it seems like Iraq did declare the trailers to the UN inspectors before the war started – which makes the Administration’s attempt to paint them as mobile WMD labs even more suspect.
No, the simplest fact is you simply have not followed the issue closely.
Perhaps, perhaps not. However the basic explanation of hydrogen generating facilities fits with uses such as doping rocket fuel.
What things have been uncovered that the UN was not aware of, that is which are relevant to the issue of NBCs?
Someone seems to be back-pedalling,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2972384.stm
The second link is the more interesting as the publisher is very right wing and would usually support a Rebublican type agenda.
Yes it is attacking the current administration and it is no friend of Tony Blair, but this lot were absolutely certain that this war was a war of self defence for the West.
My my, how things have changed.
The way I see it is that it isn’t so much a case of whether or not the Iraqi government had some minor stuff that technically contravened the anti WMD provisions of the various resolutions. What we were hearing before the war is that Iraq has enough weapons to kill everyone on the planet X times over and Iraq has missiles carrying anthrax and gas that can launch in 45 minutes. Even if the Americans and British do dig up a few dodgy trailers, that doesn’t prove all of their pre war statements and pretty much confirms that it was about oil and prestige all along. If they can find decent amounts of chemical and biological agents then I’ll concede the point(although the suspicion of framing does enter the picture). A few trailers doesn’t change the bigger issue at all.
You are aware that the US Army has mobile hydrogen labs, designed for the exact purpose of filling weather ballons, in its arsenal ? 20, to be exact. (Admittedly, the US Army prefers helium, but with 80% of the world’s helium reserves in Texas, it’s not always a viable alternative for other armies. )
I take it you are aware of the massive amounts of WMD that were destroyed under UN supervision 1991-1998 ? I mean, before you go nyah-nyah, wouldn’t it be prudent to come up with, say, one tenth of one percent of what the UN oversaw the destruction of ? Even the latest round of inspections, obviously designed to act as the US’ skimpy figleaf to get the war started with some sort of legality, uncovered 12 honest-to-goodness chemical shells - empty, but still. What weapons has the mighty US Army - with all that classified intelligence that the rest of us couldn’t see for security purposes - found ? Diddly-squat.
Not that it really matters now what the UN uncovered and didn’t uncover. The case you and yours still have to make is that Iraqi WMD were present in amounts and configurations that constituted a threat. Two trailers and a handful of centrifuge spare parts does not cut it.
As for giving it a few months, I’m very aware that a lot of the administration’s backers would like to see this issue disappear from sight. I sure as hell hope it doesn’t happen.
The offical British investigation also concluded they were not for WMDs:
“An official British investigation into two trailers found in northern Iraq has concluded they are not mobile germ warfare labs, as was claimed by Tony Blair and President George Bush, but were for the production of hydrogen to fill artillery balloons, as the Iraqis have continued to insist.”
“The conclusion by biological weapons experts working for the British Government is an embarrassment for the Prime Minister, who has claimed that the discovery of the labs proved that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction and justified the case for going to war against Saddam Hussein.”
"Instead, a British scientist and biological weapons expert, who has examined the trailers in Iraq, told The Observer last week: ‘They are not mobile germ warfare laboratories. You could not use them for making biological weapons. They do not even look like them. They are exactly what the Iraqis said they were - facilities for the production of hydrogen gas to fill balloons.’ "
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,977853,00.html
May as well cross-post this from the pit thread:
The lie squad is at it again.
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/178/nation/Bush_aides_discredit_analysts_doubts_on_trailers+.shtml
So far we’ve heard from other U.S. investigators, from British investigators, from the State Department analysts, from the British company that made the trailers, and from the U.N. inspectors. All of these people say “bullshit”. Yet Fleischer, Powell, etc. insist: “The CIA is right”.
This is a complete fucking joke.
The cherry-picking of favorable advice and the utter rejection of contrary advice is taking place right in front of everyone’s eyes.
The constant need to take what the Administration says, hold it up against the known fact, and then make the two agree with each other is , of course, what is so frustrating and exasperating about this thing. Since there is a fair fraction of the population that thinks that not only have WMDs been found, they were actually used and that Sadam was directly responsible for 9/11. I fear that a substantial portion of the electorate doesn’t care what the facts are as long as they can waive their foam “we’re number one” finger around.
The situation is made all the worse by the efforts of many to pretend that the claims that there was an immediate and direct threat to the US posed by Iraqi WMDs are not important and that the important point is that we are improving the lot of the Iraqi people, thus obscuring the pretext for the invasion and what looks like a long term occupation.
Much as I hate it, the argument that this whole thing is about oil is starting to gain more credibility. Were it otherwise wouldn’t the US be up to its neck in Congo and Liberia where there certainly is a suffering population that is a whole lot worse off than Iraq ever was.