Welcome to PatsFans.com

Saddam Hussein: I have no Weapons of Mass Destruction

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by mikey, Mar 13, 2006.

  1. mikey

    mikey In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/international/middleeast/12saddam.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


    The report is overseen by the Joint Forces Command, an unclassified version of the study is to be made public so ....

    The Iraqi dictator was so secretive and kept information so compartmentalized that his top military leaders were stunned when he told them three months before the war that he had no weapons of mass destruction, and they were demoralized because they had counted on hidden stocks of poison gas or germ weapons for the nation's defense.
    ...

    In December 2002, he told his top commanders that Iraq did not possess unconventional arms, like nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, according to the Iraq Survey Group, a task force established by the C.I.A. to investigate what happened to Iraq's weapons programs. Mr. Hussein wanted his officers to know they could not rely on poison gas or germ weapons if war broke out. The disclosure that the cupboard was bare, Mr. Aziz said, sent morale plummeting.


    .
     
  2. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Ehh, did he have WMD's, didn't he? Could he have started a program? It doesn't matter. Was he the most imminent threat to world or US security? No way.
     
  3. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    No, that would be George W Bush.
     
  4. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Sorta seems that way, now doesn't it?

    It's funny now how some people that still defend him use incompetence as an excuse. Now the argument's become "does the administration have a criminal mind or has they just botched everything despite meaning well?" I think only one half of the puzzle's coming unwrapped now - Bush's incompetence is out in the open - the criminal intent piece won't be proven until Bush has left office. I think people will be amazed how quickly that wall comes dwn.
     
  5. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Sometimes incompetence can be criminal - it's called negligence or dereliction of duty. When you're the POTUS allegedly fighting a war, you have a duty you can't neglect. Maybe he really isn't the president.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>