Sarin Part 2
The usual Right-Wing suspects, notably, Horowitz's "Front Page Magazine" and Safire, in the NYT, are leading the charge that the as yet to be confirmed-by-further-testing, missile warhead containing the alleged Sarin gas is precisely the reason we went to war with Iraq.
This is disingenuous. Both Frank Gaffney and William Safire know the publicly stated reason we went war against Iraq. It wasn't because Hussein had old warheads containing Sarin lying about.
It was because of the now entirely refuted allegation that under Saddam, Iraq was a major and growing threat to the U.S.
Lest you think I am in error, consider the following:
No. The Administration assured us, as noted in their statements above and from Bush's 2003 SOTU Address, that Iraq was a growing danger. Saddam was sending Ba'athists to conquer America. In the 2003 SOTU he delivered the following:
We had no evidence that Saddam ever had any such labs.
Chalabi and Co. told the neocons exactly what they wanted to hear. Don't need any corroborating evidence when you get your information from a convicted embezzler.
Nope.
Strange company our leaders keep.
By the way, for all of the pure bs he was spreading, Chalabi's finally getting his funding cut-off.
Remember, Chalabi and friends are the people that fed the Bush Administration packs of fabrications in order to 'assist' the current White House occupant with his pre-determined plan for dealing with the neutered Saddam.
Chalabi was the guy that could sell it to the U.S. populace. And did so.
He provided the 'product details' that fomented irrational fear and loathing of Iraq and its leader. Just exactly what was needed to get the public to support the war.
Now that we know the 'publicly stated' reason for invading sovereign Iraq, whatever is the real reason or reasons?
By the way, GW Bush is widely recognized as a unique threat in the world. His environamental policies could kill us all.
This is disingenuous. Both Frank Gaffney and William Safire know the publicly stated reason we went war against Iraq. It wasn't because Hussein had old warheads containing Sarin lying about.
It was because of the now entirely refuted allegation that under Saddam, Iraq was a major and growing threat to the U.S.
Lest you think I am in error, consider the following:
"The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace." - President Bush, 10/16/02According to the public statements of Bush Administration officials, as well at the President himself, Iraq needed to dealt with now because it was a growing threat. The reason was not whether or not we would find the odd pre-Gulf War relic.
"There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists." - President Bush, 10/7/02
"The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency." - President Bush, 10/2/02
"There's a grave threat in Iraq. There just is." - President Bush, 10/2/02
('there just is'?..not terribly convincing)
"This man poses a much graver threat than anybody could have possibly imagined." - President Bush, 9/26/02
"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02
"Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent - that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02
No. The Administration assured us, as noted in their statements above and from Bush's 2003 SOTU Address, that Iraq was a growing danger. Saddam was sending Ba'athists to conquer America. In the 2003 SOTU he delivered the following:
From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.No, we don't.
We had no evidence that Saddam ever had any such labs.
Chalabi and Co. told the neocons exactly what they wanted to hear. Don't need any corroborating evidence when you get your information from a convicted embezzler.
Nope.
Strange company our leaders keep.
By the way, for all of the pure bs he was spreading, Chalabi's finally getting his funding cut-off.
Remember, Chalabi and friends are the people that fed the Bush Administration packs of fabrications in order to 'assist' the current White House occupant with his pre-determined plan for dealing with the neutered Saddam.
Chalabi was the guy that could sell it to the U.S. populace. And did so.
He provided the 'product details' that fomented irrational fear and loathing of Iraq and its leader. Just exactly what was needed to get the public to support the war.
Now that we know the 'publicly stated' reason for invading sovereign Iraq, whatever is the real reason or reasons?
By the way, GW Bush is widely recognized as a unique threat in the world. His environamental policies could kill us all.
No comments :
Post a Comment