Remember these?

[widebody911]

But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. George W. Bush, President Interview with TVP Poland 5/30/2003

We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor CNN Late Edition 9/8/2002

How the United States should react if Iraq acquired WMD. "The first line of defense...should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence--if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration." Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor January/February 2000 issue of Foreign Affairs 2/1/2000

We are greatly concerned about any possible linkup between terrorists and regimes that have or seek weapons of mass destruction...In the case of Saddam Hussein, we've got a dictator who is clearly pursuing and already possesses some of these weapons.. A regime that hates America and everything we stand for must never be permitted to threaten America with weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President Detroit, Fund-Raiser 6/20/2002

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President Speech to VFW National Convention 8/26/2002

There is already a mountain of evidence that Saddam Hussein is gathering weapons for the purpose of using them. And adding additional information is like adding a foot to Mount Everest. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 9/6/2002

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. George W. Bush, President Speech to UN General Assembly 9/12/2002

Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have George W. Bush, President Radio Address 10/5/2002

The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas. George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons. George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon. George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas George W. Bush, President Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

Iraq, despite UN sanctions, maintains an aggressive program to rebuild the infrastructure for its nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs. In each instance, Iraq's procurement agents are actively working to obtain both weapons-specific and dual-use materials and technologies critical to their rebuilding and expansion efforts, using front companies and whatever illicit means are at hand. John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Speech to the Hudson Institute 11/1/2002

We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material -- whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability -- it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year. It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, and VX. It actively maintains all key aspects of its offensive BW [biological weapons] program. John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Speech to the Hudson Institute 11/1/2002

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide biological or chemical weapons to a terrorist group or to individual terrorists,...The war on terror will not be won until Iraq is completely and verifiably deprived of weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President Denver, Address To Air National Guard 12/1/2002

If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 12/2/2002

The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 12/4/2002

We know for a fact that there are weapons there. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 1/9/2003

I am absolutely convinced, based on the information that's been given to me, that the weapon of mass destruction which can kill more people than an atomic bomb -- that is, biological weapons -- is in the hands of the leadership of Iraq. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader MSNBC Interview 1/10/2003

What is unique about Iraq compared to, I would argue, any other country in the world, in this juncture, is the exhaustion of diplomacy thus far, and, No. 2, this intersection of weapons of mass destruction. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader NewsHour Interview 1/22/2003

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. George W. Bush, President State of the Union Address 1/28/2003

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. George W. Bush, President State of the Union Address 1/28/2003

We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to UN Security Council 2/5/2003

There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more. And he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. If biological weapons seem too terrible to contemplate, chemical weapons are equally chilling Colin Powell, Secretary of State Addresses the U.N. Security Council 2/5/2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have. George W. Bush, President Radio Address 2/8/2003

In Iraq, a dictator is building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East and intimidate the civilized world -- and we will not allow it. George W. Bush, President Speech to the American Enterprise Institute 2/26/2003

If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the crisis that we now have before us . . . But the suggestion that we are doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and rearrange all of its pieces is not correct. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Interview with Radio France International 2/28/2003

I am not eager to send young Americans into harm's way in Iraq, or to see innocent people killed or hurt in military operations. Given all of the facts and circumstances known to us, however, I am convinced that if we wait, a threat will continue to materialize in Iraq that could cause incalculable damage to world peace in general, and to the United States in particular. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Letter to Future of Freedom Foundation 3/1/2003

Iraq is a grave threat to this nation. It desires to acquire and use weapons of mass terror and is run by a despot with a proven record of willingness to use them. Iraq has had 12 years to comply with UN requirements for disarmament and has failed to do so. The president is right to say it's time has run out. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Senate Speech 3/7/2003

So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to UN Security Council 3/7/2003

Getting rid of Saddam Hussein's regime is our best inoculation. Destroying once and for all his weapons of disease and death is a vaccination for the world. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Washington Post op-ed 3/16/2003

Let's talk about the nuclear proposition for a minute. We know that based on intelligence, that [Saddam] has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He's had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. Dick Cheney, Vice President Meet The Press 3/16/2003

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. George W. Bush, President Address to the Nation 3/17/2003

The United States . . . is now at war "so we will not ever see" what terrorists could do "if supplied with weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein." Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Senate Debate 3/20/2003

[widebody911]

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 3/21/2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them. General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command Press Conference 3/22/2003

One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites. Victoria Clark, Pentagon Spokeswoman Press Briefing 3/22/2003

I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction. Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board member Washington Post, p. A27 3/23/2003

We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense ABC Interview 3/30/2003

We simply cannot live in fear of a ruthless dictator, aggressor and terrorist such as Saddam Hussein, who possesses the world's most deadly weapons. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader Speech to American Israel Political Action Committee 3/31/2003

We still need to find and secure Iraq's weapons of mass destruction facilities and secure Iraq's borders so we can prevent the flow of weapons of mass destruction materials and senior regime officials out of the country. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Conference 4/9/2003

You bet we're concerned [concerned that those weapons might have been shipped out of the country]about it. And one of the reasons it's important is because the nexus between terrorist states with weapons of mass destruction ... and terrorist groups -- networks -- is a critical link. And the thought that ... some of those materials could leave the country and [get] in the hands of terrorist networks would be a very unhappy prospect. So it is important to us to see that that doesn't happen. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Conference 4/9/2003

Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty. Robert Kagan, Neocon scholar Washington Post op-ed 4/9/2003

I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 4/10/2003

But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 4/10/2003

Were not going to find anything until we find people who tell us where the things are. And we have that very high on our priority list, to find the people who know. And when we do, then well learn precisely where things were and what was done. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Meet the Press 4/13/2003

I have absolute confidence that there are weapons of mass destruction inside this country. Whether we will turn out, at the end of the day, to find them in one of the 2,000 or 3,000 sites we already know about or whether contact with one of these officials who we may come in contact with will tell us, ``Oh, well, there's actually another site,'' and we'll find it there, I'm not sure. General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command Fox New 4/13/2003

We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them. George W. Bush, President NBC Interview 4/24/2003

There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Briefing 4/25/2003

We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so. George W. Bush, President Remarks to Reporters 5/3/2003

I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Remarks to Reporters 5/4/2003

We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Fox News Interview 5/4/2003

I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program. George W. Bush, President Remarks to Reporters 5/6/2003

U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction. Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor Reuters Interview 5/12/2003

I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're still hidden. Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne Press Briefing 5/13/2003

We said all along that we will never get to the bottom of the Iraqi WMD program simply by going and searching specific sites, that you'd have to be able to get people who know about the programs to talk to you. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense Interview with Australian Broadcasting 5/13/2003

Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found. Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps Interview with Reporters 5/21/2003

It's going to take time to find them, but we know he had them. And whether he destroyed them, moved them or hid them, we're going to find out the truth. One thing is for certain: Saddam Hussein no longer threatens America with weapons of mass destruction. George W. Bush, President Speech at a weapons factory in Ohio 5/25/2003

Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction. Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff NBC Today Show interview 5/26/2003

They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations 5/27/2003

For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense Vanity Fair interview 5/28/2003

The President is indeed satisfied with the intelligence that he received. And I think that's borne out by the fact that, just as Secretary Powell described at the United Nations, we have found the bio trucks that can be used only for the purpose of producing biological weapons. That's proof-perfect that the intelligence in that regard was right on target. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 5/29/2003

We have teams of people that are out looking. They've investigated a number of sites. And within the last week or two, they have in fact captured and have in custody two of the mobile trailers that Secretary Powell talked about at the United Nations as being biological weapons laboratories. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Infinity Radio Interview 5/30/2003

You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons ...They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. George W. Bush, President Press Briefing 5/30/2003

It was a surprise to me then -- it remains a surprise to me now -- that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there. Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Press Interview 5/30/2003

Do I think we're going to find something? Yeah, I kind of do, because I think there's a lot of information out there. Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, Defense Intelligence Agency Press Conference 5/30/2003

Q: The fact that there hasn't been substantial cache of weapons of mass destruction -- is that an embarrassment? Wolfowitz: No. Is it an embarrassment to people on the other side that we've discovered these biological production vans, which the defector told us about? Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense CNN Interview 5/31/2003

This wasn't material I was making up, it came from the intelligence community Colin Powell, Secretary of State Press Briefing 6/2/2003

We know that some of them, especially the biological weapons, were being destroyed," Hastert said, adding that it would "take a little while to find weapons of mass destruction... and we're going to continue to do it. Dennis Hastert, House Speaker R-IL Press Briefing 6/4/2003

We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents. This is the man who spent decades hiding tools of mass murder. He knew the inspectors were looking for them. You know better than me he's got a big country in which to hide them. We're on the look. We'll reveal the truth George W. Bush, President CAMP SAYLIYA, Qatar 6/5/2003

[widebody911]

I would put before you Exhibit A, the mobile biological labs that we have found. People are saying, "Well, are they truly mobile biological labs?" Yes, they are. And the DCI, George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, stands behind that assessment. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Fox News Interview 6/8/2003

No one ever said that we knew precisely where all of these agents were, where they were stored Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor Meet the Press 6/8/2003

What the president has said is because it's been the long-standing view of numerous people, not only in this country, not only in this administration, but around the world, including at the United Nations, who came to those conclusions...And the president is not going to engage in the rewriting of history that others may be trying to engage in. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Response to Question From Press 6/9/2003

Iraq had a weapons program...Intelligence throughout the decade showed they had a weapons program. I am absolutely convinced with time we'll find out they did have a weapons program. George W. Bush, President Comment to Reporters 6/9/2003

The biological weapons labs that we believe strongly are biological weapons labs, we didn't find any biological weapons with those labs. But should that give us any comfort? Not at all. Those were labs that could produce biological weapons whenever Saddam Hussein might have wanted to have a biological weapons inventory. Colin Powell, Secretary of State Associated Press Interview 6/12/2003

Those documents were only one piece of evidence in a larger body of evidence suggesting that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Africa ... The issue of Iraq's pursuit of uranium in Africa is supported by multiple sources of intelligence. The other sources of evidence did and do support the president's statement. Sean McCormack, National Security Council Spokesman Statement to press 6/13/2003

My personal view is that their intelligence has been, I'm sure, imperfect, but good. In other words, I think the intelligence was correct in general, and that you always will find out precisely what it was once you get on the ground and have a chance to talk to people and explore it, and I think that will happen. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Press Briefing 6/18/2003

I have reason, every reason, to believe that the intelligence that we were operating off was correct and that we will, in fact, find weapons or evidence of weapons, programs, that are conclusive. But that's just a matter of time...It's now less than eight weeks since the end of major combat in Iraq and I believe that patience will prove to be a virtue Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense Pentagon media briefing. 6/24/2003

MS. BLOCK: There were no toxins found in those trailers. SECRETARY POWELL: Which could mean one of several things: one, they hadn't been used yet to develop toxins; or, secondly, they had been sterilized so thoroughly that there is no residual left. It may well be that they hadn't been used yet. Colin Powell, Secretary of State All Things Considered, Interview 6/27/2003

That was the concern we had with Saddam Hussein. Not only did he have weapons -- and we'll uncover not only his weapons but all of his weapons programs -- he never lost the intent to have these kinds of weapons. Colin Powell, Secretary of State All Things Considered, Interview 6/27/2003

I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary Press Briefing 7/9/2003

[squerly]

Cliff Notes??

[creaturecat]

Mule Quote:


If I become an Anti_American, left wing, commie, pinko will I become smart like ya'll?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Thom, they've already moved on to hyping SS as a crisis that they can fix immediately with no thought as to future ramifications.

WMDs are sooooo passé these days. Now it's all about saving SS, which isn't in crisis, but geez, the scare tactics worked so well in the past, it's worth a shot. Look for a lot of rhetoric on SS mixed with Sept. 11 language.

And right wing guys, seriously, look for that combo, it's the smoking gun that your president has used/squandered/abused your conservative good will for the past several years.

Like Iraq and WMDs, I am quite sure they'll fuch this up too.

the right's new motto: Take Respsonsibility? pffft, that's for other people.

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by Shaun 84 Targa
Thom, they've already moved on to hyping SS as a crisis that they can fix immediately with no thought as to future ramifications.

WMDs are sooooo passé these days. Now it's all about saving SS, which isn't in crisis, but geez, the scare tactics worked so well in the past, it's worth a shot. Look for a lot of rhetoric on SS mixed with Sept. 11 language.

And right wing guys, seriously, look for that combo, it's the smoking gun that your president has used/squandered/abused your conservative good will for the past several years.

Like Iraq and WMDs, I am quite sure they'll fuch this up too.

the right's new motto: Take Respsonsibility? pffft, that's for other people.

It's not working on congress....dems or republicans..and that's what matters so all I can say is thank the good Lord.

[widebody911]

Privatize Social Secuity or the terrorists win!

[lendaddy]

The idea that Bush and Co. were going against the grain with the WMD call is simply B.S. My simple recollection is something like 99.4% of the world believed he had these weapons. All the Monday morning QB's crack me up. Like you guys were saying this all along, AND even if you were it's not like you had any special knowledge of the situation that would make it a credible call.

Soooo..... once again, just after 9/11, Bush feels compelled(and we were virtually ALL behind him) to make serious moves against terrorist states. Guess who was at the top 'o the list? If you don't understand how this actually occured vs "Bush is just a war lovin dumbass" then I give up. He did the right thing given the circumstance at the time.

[Moneyguy1]

I propose the following:

If a government or branch thereof tells the rest of the world that (a) is true, and says it with sufficient conviction and frequency, then takes a poll, I would not be surprised if the results showed the overwhelming majority of those responding would say that (a) is true. It is properly called Propaganda.

I have never bought into the argument that something is true simply because the majority believes it. Not quarterbacking, just unwilling to believe everything said by governments as true without some verification.

That makes me a skeptic.

[lendaddy]

Comeon Bob, I'm not even talking about American citizens and you know it...I'm talking about other countries and their leaders. You guys make it sound like Bush made this crap up when you know damn well he didn't. I have no doubt whatsoever that Bush firmly believed that Saddam had WMD's when he decided to attack, none. I also have no doubt that his belief was based on the best intelligence available. If the whole business turns out to have been illinformed, then so be it. I would want my leader to make the same general moves if the situation ever arises again, rather than assume our intel is 180 degrees out of phase.

[lendaddy]

Would also like to add. Those against going to war in the first place were not arguing the absence of WMD's, they argued Saddam would not use them, or that they were contained, or that we had no moral authority to attack based on the simple "presence of WMD's, etc.... Fine, these are debatable positions. But to pretend "any idiot should have known he didn't have WMD's" as if it were your initial position against the war is laughable.

Now that it appears he may not have had them you guys jump on with the 8 year old tactic of "nanner nanner nanner, you were wrong, nanner nanner nanner"

I guess "grow up" is my reply.

[Aurel]

So they said it was to find WMDs, but there were not any. Then, they said it was to free the Iraqui people, but they made their country an anarchic mess. Finally, they claimed it was to prevent terrorism, but the place has become a hotbed for recruiting new terrorists...the only thing they never told was that it was a mistake. I think that would be the most reasonable thing to say.

Aurel

[turbocarrera]

Originally posted by lendaddy
Would also like to add. Those against going to war in the first place were not arguing the absence of WMD's, they argued Saddam would not use them, or that they were contained, or that we had no moral authority to attack based on the simple "presence of WMD's, etc.... Fine, these are debatable positions. But to pretend "any idiot should have known he didn't have WMD's" as if it were your initial position against the war is laughable.

Now that it appears he may not have had them you guys jump on with the 8 year old tactic of "nanner nanner nanner, you were wrong, nanner nanner nanner"

I guess "grow up" is my reply.

That is 100% bull*****.

The people who were against the war in the first place were the people who actually paid attention to what the inspectors were doing. They had complete unfettered access to any site in Iraq - including the presidential palaces. There were hundreds of them(200 bona-fide weapons inspection experts), with hundreds of logistical support personnel, helicopters, humvee's, magic carpets - you name it.

I'll let Scott Ritter (former cheif UN weapons inspector, US Marine Corps intelligence officer, Gulf-War Veteran, and registered Republican) spell it out for you.


Monday October 7, 2002

As a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and as a registered member of the Republican party who voted for George Bush in the last presidential election, I have to admit to a certain trepidation and uncertainty when I was asked by Labour MPs to participate in the massive anti-war rally in London on September 28.

In my way of thinking, mass demonstrations, regardless of the righteousness of the cause, were the theatre of the political left, and not something with which I should be associated. I was proven wrong on all counts. The outpouring of democratic will that occurred on that day came not only from the left, but from across the breadth of mainstream British society. It sent a message to a Blair government that had grown increasingly isolated from public opinion: UK support for an American unilateral war on Iraq would not be tolerated. That message met a response a few days later from the Labour party at its annual conference in Blackpool. Democracy in action is a wonderful thing.

To many Americans, myself included, the granting of such powers represents a breach of constitutional responsibility on the part of Congress, which alone under the constitution of the United States is authorised to declare war.

Where are the large-scale US demonstrations in support of this struggle? Where are the voices of outrage over what amounts to a frontal assault on the constitution of the United States? Democracy silenced is awful.

The constitution has always guided me in my actions as an American citizen. It establishes the US as a nation of laws, and sets high standards for the ideals we Americans strive to achieve as a nation. As an officer of Marines, I took an oath to defend the US constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It is an oath I take very seriously and I am willing to give my life in defence of this document - something I demonstrated during my time in uniform, including service in Operation Desert Storm.

I am no pacifist, but I am opposed to President Bush's rush towards war with Iraq this time around. As signatories to the UN charter, Americans have agreed to abide by a body of international law that explicitly governs the conditions under which nations may go to war. All require authority of the security council, either through an invocation of article 51 (self defence), or a resolution passed under chapter seven of the charter (collective security).

President Bush's case for war simply has not been demonstrated to meet any of these criteria. The president repeatedly announced that Iraq has failed to comply with its obligation to disarm, and as such poses a threat to international peace and security. The president declared that Iraq must allow weapons inspectors to return to Iraq, without conditions, with unfettered access to all sites. Iraq's failure to allow inspectors to return to work since their withdrawal in December 1998 has prompted fear in many circles (recently demonstrated by the UK government's dossier on Iraqi weapons programs) that Iraq has taken advantage of the intervening time to reconstitute its weapons of mass destruction programs dismantled under UN supervision. With no inspectors in Iraq, it was impossible to know for certain what the regime of Saddam Hussein was up to; and, given Iraq's past record of deceit over these weapons, the US and others were justified in presuming ill intent.

But now Iraq has agreed to allow the inspectors to return, unconditionally, and to be held accountable to the rule of law as set forth in existing security council resolutions governing Iraq's disarmament. The opportunity finally exists to bring clarity to years of speculation about the potential threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, as well as an opportunity to resolve this ongoing crisis of international law peacefully.

But President Bush refuses to take "yes" for an answer. The Bush administration's actions lay bare the mythology that this war is being fought over any threat posed by Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. It has made it clear that its objective is the elimination of Saddam Hussein. And this is where I have a fundamental problem. The UN charter prohibits regime removal. The US constitution states that international agreements entered into by the United States carry the force of law. The US has signed the UN charter. Regime removal is not only a violation of international law, it is unconstitutional.

There is a way to deal with the need to change a regime deemed to be a risk to international peace and security, and that is through the UN. If President Bush truly wanted to seek regime removal in Baghdad, then he would push for an indictment of Saddam Hussein and his senior leadership in the international court for crimes against humanity, something that should not prove hard to do, given the record of the Butcher of Baghdad (and something other members of the UN would clearly support as an alternative to war). But seeking judgment through the international court requires a recognition by the US of the primacy of international law, something the Bush administration has been loath to do.

The fact of the matter is this crisis between Iraq and the US goes beyond even the issue of regime removal. It represents the first case study of the implementation of a new US national security strategy, published last month, which sets forth a doctrine of unilateralism that capitalises on American military and economic might to maintain the US as the sole superpower, to impose our will on the rest of the world, even through pre-emptive military action. This strategy is a rejection of multilateralism, a turning away from the concepts of international law.

This new Bush doctrine of American unilateralism reeks of imperial power, the very power against which Americans fought a revolution more than 200 years ago. The streets of Washington DC are empty of demonstrators protesting at this frontal assault on American democracy. Will the streets of London be filled again with protesters against this assault on the rule of international law? I certainly hope so, because the people of Britain could lead by example, sending a clear signal to fellow practitioners of democracy in America that when it comes to determining what actions a government takes in the name of the people, the will of the people cannot be ignored.

Scott Ritter
WSRitter@aol.com


If Bush, and the rest of his bought_and_paid_for administration, are not war-criminals, surely they're complete *********s.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by lendaddy
Would also like to add. Those against going to war in the first place were not arguing the absence of WMD's, they argued Saddam would not use them, or that they were contained, or that we had no moral authority to attack based on the simple "presence of WMD's, etc.... Fine, these are debatable positions. But to pretend "any idiot should have known he didn't have WMD's" as if it were your initial position against the war is laughable.

Now that it appears he may not have had them you guys jump on with the 8 year old tactic of "nanner nanner nanner, you were wrong, nanner nanner nanner"

I guess "grow up" is my reply.

Len, I think you are romanticizing the past. I am not sure if I have any magical powers, but I never believed he had WMDs. the 20 or so people from Belgium, France, Switzerland, Kentucky, Spain, and Germany I hiked with through New Zealand just before the war didn't believe he hasd WMDs. Many in the CIA didn't believe he had WMDs. The number of worldwide citizens who ddidn't think he had WMDs is staggeringly large.

As a news junky, the one thing that struck me as I watched Fox, CNN and Meet the Press, was how contrived the story was. None of it seemed real or credible, but it was well-positioned. But it was scary. We had to act. the weapons inspectors were doing their job. Certainly you agree that as long as weapons inspectors are in the country, if even he had WMDs, he couldn't use them. He was contained.

Which would you rather pay for: next 20+ years of inspectors or the current war?

Please accept that this whole thing was first contrived and then bungled to the nth degree, as it continues to do so today. Our country is lesser for it. We've talked about the moral high ground in other threads. It's a ghost. No one has it. Yes, I believe we've lost close to 1400 soldiers and wounded and maimed over 10,000 others for nothing.

When Iraq goes into civil war, or elects a government based on religion, who will you blame? What will you say to those soldiers' families?

and even if we had incontrovertible evidence of WMDs, which we did not, we still rushed. We didn't build a real coalition. We didn't arm our soldiers well, we had to pass legislation after the fact to do that, the same legislation that was pork-barreled to no end. and still well over 2 years later we still haven't done right by all of them.

I don't know, I just picture every right winger in this country grabbing his ankles every time Bush/Cheney/Rove says anything.

You deserve better.

[Tim Hancock]

I never cared about the WMD in the first place. Iraq's blatant disregard disregard to complying fully with 10 yrs of UN resolutions and firing on our aircraft routinely that were patrolling the No-Fly zone was reason enough. We should have done it sooner, but the UN just did not have the fortitude to back up their resolutions. Doesn't anyone remember the times that inspectors were denied entry at various sites. A logical person would come to the conclusion that they had something to hide.

By the way, aircraft were found buried in the sand. If I wanted to hide a truckload of WMD in a country the size of Iraq, I bet I could and no one would ever find it. Do you think you could?

[lendaddy]

Ok, I'll grant you Ritter, I should have mentioned him. So, given that his testimony was so moving and powerful to you, certainly you can give me a few US officials (liberals are OK) who agreed with him(and apparently you). I mean the US congressmen and women (whom I assume had a touch more intel than either you or Shaun and his hiking buddies) should certainly have come to such a logical conclusion as yours, right? So, just name a few and I'll call it a day. Hell I've been wrong before and I admit it when true.

Back to what I said before. You and Shaun apparently claim you knew or believed he possesed no WMD's prior to the invasion. Just curious, what did you base this belief on? Just Ritter? I mean the inspectors would be sorta pointless if they too "knew" there was nothing to find, yes? Why were they there? I mean if a couple liberal hikers in Oregon "know" he doesn't have them then surely the UN should know as well

As a side note, aren't you supremely pissed at your liberal reps in the congress? I mean they must have known what you two knew right? And they didn't stand up and say it?!?! I am appalled! Or maybe all of this a little revisionist history?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Len, I'll look for some sources, stay tuned.

Stand up against the war? HA! Didn't you know, there is a direct correlation between 9/11 and Iraq. If you stood up against the war, you are all for letting the terrorists win, those 3000 people would die in vain, you'd be a traitor to your country. I say this with much respect, but it's incredibly naíve to think that any political figure coud have credibly opposed the adminstration's pre-war agenda. McCarthyism has nothing over Bush.

Who's hiking in Oregon?

How did I know? I could see through the rhetoric, simple as that. It just wasn't compelling. It didn't ring true. Too many holes. It may sound simplistic, but I just never bought the story or drank the Kool-Aid (R).

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Shaun 84 Targa
Len, I'll look for some sources, stay tuned.

Stand up against the war? HA! Didn't you know, there is a direct correlation between 9/11 and Iraq. If you stood up against the war, you are all for letting the terrorists win, those 3000 people would die in vain, you'd be a traitor to your country. I say this with much respect, but it's incredibly naíve to think that any political figure coud have credibly opposed the adminstration's pre-war agenda. McCarthyism has nothing over Bush.

Who's hiking in Oregon?

How did I know? I could see through the rhetoric, simple as that. It just wasn't compelling. It didn't ring true. Too many holes. It may sound simplistic, but I just never bought the story or drank the Kool-Aid (R).

The Hiking in Oregon was just a little humor for effect

And, I didn't say "who stood against the war", I asked who said there were no WMD's. Ironically though you will have an easier time finding examples of the former Interesting huh?

A little more humor: Are you suggesting we replace our CIA/FBI and other intel sources with a few folks with "liberal intuition"?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

LOL! not so much intuition as clarity of thought.

Just like the chimp that can pick stocks better than Wall Street's average, I think intuition would probably have a better track record than the CIA.