NYT: Iraqi Scientist Details Weapons, al Qaeda Ties

[Nie Trink Wasser]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/21/international/worldspecial/21CHEM.html?ex=1051502400&en=558d233800fc6bc9&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

"Iraq destroyed chemical weapons and biological warfare equipment only days before the war began." Apparently, it was the threat of force--and not the threat of U.N. inspections--that finally convinced Saddam Hussein to dismantle his weapons program.

"[S]tarting in the mid-1990s, Iraq had secretly sent unconventional weapons and technology to Syria" and "more recently was cooperating with al Qaeda". Still not convinced that Iraq was central to the war on terror?

Recently, Iraq shifted focus to "research and development projects that are virtually impervious to detection by international inspectors." Perhaps Saddam Hussein sought to turn Iraq into a clearinghouse for weapons development information. This, coupled with the al Qaeda link, underscores the danger that Saddam Hussein's regime posed.

[Segnosaur]

I won't believe this until its been verified by FoxNews.

[Gem]

Wasn't there a sciencetist before who said there weren't any? What I wonder of course is what makes this one more trustworthy?

Of course, he could be right.

Gem

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/21/international/worldspecial/21CHEM.html?ex=1051502400&en=558d233800fc6bc9&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

"Iraq destroyed chemical weapons and biological warfare equipment only days before the war began." Apparently, it was the threat of force--and not the threat of U.N. inspections--that finally convinced Saddam Hussein to dismantle his weapons program.

"[S]tarting in the mid-1990s, Iraq had secretly sent unconventional weapons and technology to Syria" and "more recently was cooperating with al Qaeda". Still not convinced that Iraq was central to the war on terror?

Recently, Iraq shifted focus to "research and development projects that are virtually impervious to detection by international inspectors." Perhaps Saddam Hussein sought to turn Iraq into a clearinghouse for weapons development information. This, coupled with the al Qaeda link, underscores the danger that Saddam Hussein's regime posed.

To: Nie Trink Wasser

You asked if I was still not convinced that Iraq was central to the war on terror?

I have to say; Yes, I am still not convinced that Iraq was central to the war on terror.

Take a second look at that article in particular to the two paragraphs at the bottom:

The scientist has told MET Alpha members that because Iraq's unconventional weapons programs were highly compartmented, he only had firsthand information about the chemical weapons sector in which he worked, team members said.

But he has given the Americans information about other unconventional weapons activities, they said, as well as information about Iraqi weapons cooperation with Syria, and with terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda. It was not clear how the scientist knew of such a connection.

The article was based on one report from one source who only had direct knowledge of one thing (in this case, Iraq's Chemical Weapon Program).

Practically speaking, so what? Everyone has known for decades that Iraq has been developing chemical weapons.

At best, this person may be able to provide a little bit of information regarding an Iraq/Terrorist connection, but certainly not enough to show that the recent war on Iraq was a necessary part of the War on Terrorism.

[corplinx]

If they destroyed chemical agents, there will be evidence. I'll hold my breath until we see it. This guy could easily be saying what we want to hear. if there were no weapons to begin with, he knows we won't want to hear that.

[Agammamon]

Where are the facilities to destroy the weapons? We use incinerators, not something that is easily hideable. Where are the shell casings? The storage containers? There's more to a chem/bio weapon than just the warhead. You don't just screw a chem warhead onto a mortar shell or bomb casing. And have these weapons to be a credible threat you'll need a lot of mortars and bombs which can't be disposed of at a moments notice. In all this we aren't finding any weapons components or manufacturing facilities.

[Lothian]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/21/international/worldspecial/21CHEM.html?ex=1051502400&en=558d233800fc6bc9&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

"Iraq destroyed chemical weapons and biological warfare equipment only days before the war began." Apparently, it was the threat of force--and not the threat of U.N. inspections--that finally convinced Saddam Hussein to dismantle his weapons program.
. You are saying that Iraq had fully disarmed all weapons of mass destruction before the liberation of the oil fields. If so the official justification for the war collapses as Iraq was no longer able to give weapons to terrorists. All those deaths could have been prevented.

[crackmonkey]

Well, according to the source he did it just days before the invasion, with no admission to the allies that he ever possessed WMD or that he was destroying it. In keeping it secret, Saddam was denying the allies a reason NOT to invade.

[Lothian]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
Well, according to the source he did it just days before the invasion, with no admission to the allies that he ever possessed WMD or that he was destroying it. In keeping it secret, Saddam was denying the allies a reason NOT to invade. What we really needed was an independent inspection force with unlimited access powers to search…. hang on….didn’t we…..Oh well.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Agammamon
Where are the facilities to destroy the weapons? We use incinerators, not something that is easily hideable. Where are the shell casings? The storage containers? There's more to a chem/bio weapon than just the warhead. You don't just screw a chem warhead onto a mortar shell or bomb casing. And have these weapons to be a credible threat you'll need a lot of mortars and bombs which can't be disposed of at a moments notice. In all this we aren't finding any weapons components or manufacturing facilities.

Ironically, this same argument was being made prior to the war, by the pro-invasion people. (In other words, we asked Iraq for proof that they had destroyed their weapons. Iraq claimed they did, but they failed to produce evidence like you described above.)

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Lothian
All those deaths could have been prevented. Yes but thousands of innocent people would have continued to disapear in the night. Thousands would have been tortured and maimed (Saddams henchen like to cut the ears of people). Thousands would have been wrongly imprisoned. The loss of life caused by the war is tragic but it was not for nothing.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Lothian
What we really needed was an independent inspection force with unlimited access powers to search…. hang on….didn’t we…..Oh well. It turns out that because all of the movements of the inspectors were tracked and that Saddam had 12 years to perfect his deception they never would have been able to find the evidence....oh well.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by RandFan
It turns out that because all of the movements of the inspectors were tracked and that Saddam had 12 years to perfect his deception they never would have been able to find the evidence....oh well.
Not to mention the fact that the inspectors weren't really given 'complete' access.

One of the sections of 1441 allowed the inspectors complete access to Iraqi scientists and technicians, under the UNs terms (allowing them to transport anyone away from Iraq if they felt like their lives would be in danger by talking.) Iraq did not provide full access as required.