5+ months and no WMD’s, no WMD programs, nothing. And there seems to be more “terrorists” in Iraq now then before. Nicely done Curious George. And Afganistan is going peachy too.
6 in 10 Americans call shenanigans on the latest Bush p.r. attempt:
Of course the difference between me and George is that I was within a few thousand yards of the White House on 9/11, and I bothered to finish my term of military service. Bring them on indeed.
If indeed all had been destroyed then Hussein not letting the inspectors back in with the threat of devestating war looming was one of the dumbest miscalculations of all time, shortly ahead of his “Mother of all battles” boast.
Well, not to belabor the obvious, but Blix isn’t exactly in a position to call shenanigans, either. If I recall, he went before the UN Security Council and declared Saddam in material breach of UNSCR 1441.
So, now Blix comes out and says that the weapons were destroyed 10 years ago, when he could have said that months before and prevented all of this? I give that one a big :rolleyes:. Talk about revisionist history.
Save your rolleyes- he had been saying that for a while, but Bush and his cronies responded with personal attacks and dimissals. Becuase they had proof that Iraq had WMD’s ready to go.
The whole war could have been averted if Hans Blix had said so six months ago? I didn’t know the invasion had anything to do with WMD. I thought it was all about freeing the noble Iraqi people who will greet us like liberators, and stopping the atrocities and preserving democracy and making Baghdad safe for baseball, Mom, and apple pie.
So Bush et al. made him declare Saddam in material breach of the resolution. That’s what you’re saying, right? Otherwise, you’re full of crap. If Blix knew they didn’t exist, how could he declare Saddam in material breach, since that was the substance of the resolution? He didn’t know squat, he thought they were there, and he said so to the Security Council. Now he’s playing CYA after the fact because his credibility is just as shot as Bush’s.
Don’t try to blow smoke up my ass. It’s a beautiful, and obvious example of revisionist history.
Would not a better tack for the anti-Bush folk be to ask how Bush is such an idiot for not finding the bad stuff instead insisting it was never there? Everybody at one point (Clinton/UN) was pretty convinced it was. Or has this been covered ad nauseum in GD and I didn’t see it?
Can I have a cite for that one? I’d appreciate anything from Blix before the war indicating that Iraq had already destroyed their WMD. All I remember is him saying Iraq was kind of cooperating now and they hadn’t found anything yet (other than the long range missles).
Well, obviously Bush’s ‘evidence’ was a steaming pile, don’t think some of us who supported the war aren’t pretty pissed off about that.
Saying Saddam hasn’t accounted for all of his weapons is what made Blix say he was in material breach, IiRC. He could very well have destroyed the weapons, and then proceed to not tell anyone.
Yes, there are valid reasons to do this.
He’s thinking of his own security. If neighboring countries knew for sure that he had disbanded the weapons, there would be a risk of invasion from Iran or Saudi Arabia, in Saddam’s mind. Thus, he might have destroyed the weapons to appease the UN, but have still kept it ambiguous enough to not compromise his own security. Deterrence, and all that.
He is becoming a clown and a caricature of himself. The more he mentions 9/11 for no reason the more people will get tired of it and roll their eyes.
i have to say I did not expect events to catch up with him so fast and I look forward to several months of enjoyment while I watch him squirm and worry and beg. If it were not for the many people on both sides who are dead or wounded or destitute as a result of his actions, I would say it is almost worth it. Unfortunately the price is horrendous and still growing every day. I hope he pays a high price for it.
Here is Hans Blix’ final report to the UN Security Council. In no way does he declare Iraq in material breach of 1441. He says that their cooperation had been less than immediate, but that is not the same thing. He strongly urges that more time be spent on inspections, and that Iraq is showing encouraging signs of cooperation. Moreover, nowhere does he state that he believes Iraq currently had stockpiles of WMD. Of course, he had to operate on the assumption that they did – he’s chief weapons inspector. It’s his job to exhaust every possible lead in the time he had [sub]before being prematurely kicked out so that Bush can start his war[/sub].
The same Google search turned up an interesting Reuters article on Hans Blix’ comments about WMD after the war had started.
Thinking maybe they’re setting up Cheney to take the fall. White House came out and said they had no proof that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11, in effect distancing themselves from his remarks on Sunday. Uh oh.
