Bothered by Powell, etc.
Colin comes clean - sort-of. It's certainly not news to readers of this site that Powell's critical presentation to the U.N. was deeply flawed and out of date.
Also, in the same linked article, it is being reported that the U.S. is moving 4,000 troops from South Korea to Iraq. Coincidentally, IAEA chief Mohammed El-Baradei declares North Korea to the number one "international security concern." I think that this is demonstrably false. I'll elucidate later.
Again, drawing from the same article, King Abdullah of Jordan sees an Iraqi civil war more likely now than a year ago.
Abdullah:
A shout to newly linked blog Digital Dissent for the heads-up on the El-Baradei assertions, and Powell's admission of 'being duped.' I don't buy Powell's explanation.
If Saddam's neighbors in the region weren't in fear of him, and remember, he invaded both Iran and Kuwait, then how come the Bush Administration officials were talking of 'mushroom clouds' and thousands of liters of chem. and bio-weapons?
The first Gulf war, a decade plus of sanctions, along with the now rarely mentioned UNMOVIC triad had left Iraq the weakest country in the region. We knew it, and so did Iraq's neighbors. It was an unpopular fact to mention that perhaps all of Iraq's WMD capacities were destroyed. Either during Gulf War I, or during the subsequent UNMOVIC actions, all verified WMD facilities were eliminated as a source of production.
That begs the question: What about existing hidden stockpiles?
The answer is that were never any viable WMD stockpiles. Iraq likely never developed adequately stabilized agents to store for long periods. Everything used to engender fear in the American population so that there would be popular support for the war were ghosts in the sands of Iraq.
Now, faced with the lack of Saddam's feared WMD programs, we are faced with explaining how the hell we were so wrong? We weren't wrong. We knew Saddam was no threat. That is the only explanation that makes sufficient sense to me.
Since Powell is on the hotseat, we might as well dispense with the myth that Powell is the Administration moderate. There is simply no evidence to support this oft repeated claim. Just because you may be slightly to the left of Donald Rumsfeld does not make you a moderate.
If presented with contrary evidence, I'll post a retraction.
Also, in the same linked article, it is being reported that the U.S. is moving 4,000 troops from South Korea to Iraq. Coincidentally, IAEA chief Mohammed El-Baradei declares North Korea to the number one "international security concern." I think that this is demonstrably false. I'll elucidate later.
Again, drawing from the same article, King Abdullah of Jordan sees an Iraqi civil war more likely now than a year ago.
Abdullah:
"If we see a disintegration of Iraq, if we see, God forsake, the worst scenario, civil war, then the whole region will be dragged into Iraq."There is a lot more at link - the article is a meta-article. It would be a great format if it provided more depth, or links to more in-depth articles.
A shout to newly linked blog Digital Dissent for the heads-up on the El-Baradei assertions, and Powell's admission of 'being duped.' I don't buy Powell's explanation.
If Saddam's neighbors in the region weren't in fear of him, and remember, he invaded both Iran and Kuwait, then how come the Bush Administration officials were talking of 'mushroom clouds' and thousands of liters of chem. and bio-weapons?
The first Gulf war, a decade plus of sanctions, along with the now rarely mentioned UNMOVIC triad had left Iraq the weakest country in the region. We knew it, and so did Iraq's neighbors. It was an unpopular fact to mention that perhaps all of Iraq's WMD capacities were destroyed. Either during Gulf War I, or during the subsequent UNMOVIC actions, all verified WMD facilities were eliminated as a source of production.
That begs the question: What about existing hidden stockpiles?
The answer is that were never any viable WMD stockpiles. Iraq likely never developed adequately stabilized agents to store for long periods. Everything used to engender fear in the American population so that there would be popular support for the war were ghosts in the sands of Iraq.
Now, faced with the lack of Saddam's feared WMD programs, we are faced with explaining how the hell we were so wrong? We weren't wrong. We knew Saddam was no threat. That is the only explanation that makes sufficient sense to me.
Since Powell is on the hotseat, we might as well dispense with the myth that Powell is the Administration moderate. There is simply no evidence to support this oft repeated claim. Just because you may be slightly to the left of Donald Rumsfeld does not make you a moderate.
If presented with contrary evidence, I'll post a retraction.
No comments :
Post a Comment