Here we go again... illegitimate domestic regime and WMDs

[Wizard777]

We Don't! But Israel won't care, they will do it anyway even if they have to do it unilaterally.

Actually we do have one thing that would absolutely do that. But it would be a case of the cure being far worse than the disease. I think what would cool Israels jets is to tell them in no uncertain terms. That if they bomb it and of that gas makes it to Turkey. When the fit hits the shan. For US it's going to come down to Treaties and our Treaties say we have to side with Turkey. Our "special relationship" with Israel isn't special enough to trump a Treaty.

[dsummoner]

Got to 'run away' Mrs Byng says it might only be 9:20 there but it is 12:20 here and it is time for my big bedroom computer screen to morph into a TV!

Good night, my friend. Give Mrs. Byng a big hug from ol' DSummoner.

[Wizard777]

The single page on Iraq's portable chemical laboratories that was the first thing Powell questioned as being junk morphed into a 48 page formal report less than 24 hours later, was produced in two offices that had nothing to do with USIC but were stamped and titled as if they had?

Once boots hit the ground we found those portable chemical laboratories. They were FIRE TRUCKS. Ironically enough the fire trucks they were replaced with in the rebuilding of Iraq had no visable hoses on their exterior. I kid you not.

[Joy in Mudville]

But the USIC said that Iraq was reconstituting its WMD program (and the USIC could never be wrong). Since those WMDs were not found they must have been moved somewhere.

Today it is Syria, tomorrow Iran.

The intelligence on Iraq was contradictory and largely inconclusive. The politicos in the Bush White House cherry-picked the nasty bits to paint a far more compelling case for an Iraqi wmd program than was actually supported by the facts. Or, as the British put it in their particular language, the intelligence was being "fixed around the policy."

It is very well documented that the Bush administration wanted to topple Iraq even before 9/11 and that wmd gave them the most plausible excuse to do so. The biggest crime is that the so-called liberal media was cowed into going along for the ride but anyone willing to do even a modest amount of digging could see that their case on WMD was specious at best.

While this is certainly a very cautionary tale the differences in the circumstances and the facts between then and now are manifold and significant.

[Byng]

The intelligence on Iraq was contradictory and largely inconclusive. The politicos in the Bush White House cherry-picked the nasty bits to paint a far more compelling case for an Iraqi wmd program than was actually supported by the facts. Or, as the British put it in their particular language, the intelligence was being "fixed around the policy."

It is very well documented that the Bush administration wanted to topple Iraq even before 9/11 and that wmd gave them the most plausible excuse to do so. The biggest crime is that the so-called liberal media was cowed into going along for the ride but anyone willing to do even a modest amount of digging could see that their case on WMD was specious at best.

While this is certainly a very cautionary tale the differences in the circumstances and the facts between then and now are manifold and significant.

Russia is the difference in Syria in that they are basically all that has stood between the Assad Regime falling much earlier than this and direct foreign intervention in Syria, be that by neighboring countries including Israel or by the United States and NATO to remove Assad. Plus of course in the case of Israel they would have been happier initially to see Assad remain in power than face the alternative.

If there was any doubt that Syria in fact had chemical and/or biological weapons of significance ready to go in their arsenal Russia would be speaking up to deny their existence. But as late as yesterday when the Russian Foreign Minister spoke at a meeting of NATO all he would say was that the Assad Regime would not use its WMD's against its own people. So the fact that Syria has them is not in dispute the question on the table is whether or not they would use them.

It now appears that it is just a matter of time as to when the Assad government will fall and not if it will fall and that time now appears to be imminent regardless of direct foreign intervention. So the subject of the WMD's falling into the wrong hands is a critical issue regardless of who we deem those wrong hands to be.

Any help that we might get from the Russians in a joint effort with the United States and/or others to secure or remove these weapons will probably depend on on how likely it would be that Russia would get to retain its warm water ports for its black sea fleet in a post Assad Syria. And my guess would be, not very likely.

[flyboy56]

Germany approves Patriot missile system for Turkey defense.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-871378.html

[Wizard777]

Russia is the difference in Syria in that they are basically all that has stood between the Assad Regime falling much earlier than this and direct foreign intervention in Syria, be that by neighboring countries including Israel or by the United States and NATO to remove Assad. Plus of course in the case of Israel they would have been happier initially to see Assad remain in power than face the alternative.

If there was any doubt that Syria in fact had chemical and/or biological weapons of significance ready to go in their arsenal Russia would be speaking up to deny their existence. But as late as yesterday when the Russian Foreign Minister spoke at a meeting of NATO all he would say was that the Assad Regime would not use its WMD's against its own people. So the fact that Syria has them is not in dispute the question on the table is whether or not they would use them.

It now appears that it is just a matter of time as to when the Assad government will fall and not if it will fall and that time now appears to be imminent regardless of direct foreign intervention. So the subject of the WMD's falling into the wrong hands is a critical issue regardless of who we deem those wrong hands to be.

Any help that we might get from the Russians in a joint effort with the United States and/or others to secure or remove these weapons will probably depend on on how likely it would be that Russia would get to retain its warm water ports for its black sea fleet in a post Assad Syria. And my guess would be, not very likely.

It's also known that Syria got their Chemweapons from Russia. I would say that Russia will be on the hotseat if they use them. But Saddam used the chemweapons we gave him and we weren't put on the hotseat.

[Byng]

Once boots hit the ground we found those portable chemical laboratories. They were FIRE TRUCKS. Ironically enough the fire trucks they were replaced with in the rebuilding of Iraq had no visable hoses on their exterior. I kid you not.

State Department Intelligence staff studied the information on the Bio Labs and the provided photographic evidence supplied by the CIA (or others) and concluded that the vans in question and being used to make Bush and Cheney's case for war were not Bio Labs.

Powell's own view was that the van that was photographed was crude, open, and poorly constructed; and only vaguely resembled a sophisticated facility for producing biological weapons and this was considered the closest that anybody came to finding evidence of WMD's in Iraq!

When he questioned the evidence because it had been included as part of his UN speech a twenty eight page pamphlet appeared on his desk the next day, stamped that it had come from the CIA, INSISTING that this is what these vans were for, even though his own intelligence staff were saying that there was no way that the vans could have produced chemical weapons.

[flyboy56]

Of course, the difference this time is that Syria actually does have one of the world's largest stockpiles of chemical weapons.

Does Syria make their own chemical weapons? Or just maybe the intel the Bush administration received from satellite images showing convoys of trucks leaving Iraq and going into Syria during the Iraq war was Iraq's WMD stockpile that produced fears of a chemical attack by Iraq on US soldiers.

[Byng]

Does Syria make their own chemical weapons? Or just maybe the intel the Bush administration received from satellite images showing convoys of trucks leaving Iraq and going into Syria during the Iraq war was Iraq's WMD stockpile that produced fears of a chemical attack by Iraq on US soldiers.

Any idea as to why Saddam would transfer his WMD to Syria? Rather than the reason for us to invade as the foolish believed, they were the only reason keeping us from invading in case he did have them and actually used them!

Is your explanation that Saddam thought if I get these weapons out of the country and show them I don't have any, they will play nice and let me go?

[flyboy56]

Any idea as to why Saddam would transfer his WMD to Syria? Rather than the reason for us to invade as the foolish believed, they were the only reason keeping us from invading in case he did have them and actually used them!

Is your explanation that Saddam thought if I get these weapons out of the country and show them I don't have any, they will play nice and let me go?

The way Saddam played games with the IEAE during the months leading up to the war shows he was very much into cat and mouse games. And he did use chemicals on his own people so we know he had them. I'm guessing he did not want the US to take them away, and with his ego as big as it was, he believed he would stay in power and would eventually have them moved back to Iraq. Foolish thinking yes, but we are talking about a criminally insane wack job.

[Byng]

The way Saddam played games with the IEAE during the months leading up to the war shows he was very much into cat and mouse games. And he did use chemicals on his own people so we know he had them. I'm guessing he did not want the US to take them away, and with his ego as big as it was, he believed he would stay in power and would eventually have them moved back to Iraq. Foolish thinking yes, but we are talking about a criminally insane whack job.

This criminally insane whack-job, in his own words "was bluffing", to keep Iran at bay.

The actual "whack-jobs" were Bush and Cheney who made it abundantly clear before they screwed up the invasion and occupation of Iraq that Syria was next on their list before they took a walk through the park in Iran

Are you really naive enough to believe that Assad would take Saddam's WMD stockpile for safe-keeping?

[Byng]

The way Saddam played games with the IEAE during the months leading up to the war shows he was very much into cat and mouse games. And he did use chemicals on his own people so we know he had them. I'm guessing he did not want the US to take them away, and with his ego as big as it was, he believed he would stay in power and would eventually have them moved back to Iraq. Foolish thinking yes, but we are talking about a criminally insane wack job.

What cat and mouse games? The only people playing games were the inspectors chasing their own tails, because there was nothing to find in the first place!

[flyboy56]

What cat and mouse games? The only people playing games were the inspectors chasing their own tails, because there was nothing to find in the first place!

Wikileaks says otherwise. And they have provided military secrets recently.

http://startthinkingright.wordpress....-invaded-iraq/

[dsummoner]

The intelligence on Iraq was contradictory and largely inconclusive. The politicos in the Bush White House cherry-picked the nasty bits to paint a far more compelling case for an Iraqi wmd program than was actually supported by the facts. Or, as the British put it in their particular language, the intelligence was being "fixed around the policy."

My assessment would not nearly be so kind. An underlying and critical aspect of any analytic endeavor within the intelligence context is the methodology that is being employed. The failures in regards to the Iraqi context, relating to multiple loci of crystallized analytic endeavor, across the USIC were legion. The Silberman-Robb Commission report and the National Security Archive detail only a portion these problems. The politicization of the intelligence process provided a nasty feedback loop in relation to this underlying process.

In a way, it is regrettable that this forum is one of general anonymity. I have done more than a small amount of work in regards to the underlying issues that I have raised in the previous paragraph (and should events turn out as expected such work will be merely foundational). I respect your opinions even though I am in marked disagreement with a large number of them. In a different time and a different place, I would be more than happy to share such work with you as the best work is that which is subject to critique.

It is very well documented that the Bush administration wanted to topple Iraq even before 9/11 and that wmd gave them the most plausible excuse to do so. The biggest crime is that the so-called liberal media was cowed into going along for the ride but anyone willing to do even a modest amount of digging could see that their case on WMD was specious at best.

On the emphasized, I agree. In the defense of the media and in regards to the dangers of both the a posteriori analytic perspective and the opaque transparency of secrecy, it is from the retrospective perspective, that one sees exactly how poor the case was for the casus belli.

While this is certainly a very cautionary tale the differences in the circumstances and the facts between then and now are manifold and significant.

I will have to respectfully disagree with you on this assessment.

[flyboy56]

This criminally insane whack-job, in his own words "was bluffing", to keep Iran at bay.

The actual "whack-jobs" were Bush and Cheney who made it abundantly clear before they screwed up the invasion and occupation of Iraq that Syria was next on their list before they took a walk through the park in Iran

Are you really naive enough to believe that Assad would take Saddam's WMD stockpile for safe-keeping?

The phrase the enemy of my enemy is my friend is a proverb that advances the concept that because two parties have a common enemy, they can work with each other to advance their common goals. Often described as an Arabic proverb.

[flyboy56]

U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said Thursday that intelligence about Syrian chemical weapons "raises serious concerns" that the regime of Bashar Assad may use them against the country's own citizens. Panetta repeated the stern warning issued earlier this week by President Barack Obama that "there will be consequences of the Assad regime make the terrible mistake by using these chemical weapons on their own people."
His comments came a day after U.S. officials told NBC News that the Syrian military had loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped from dozens of fighter-bombers. The defense chief, who was speaking at a news conference at the Department of Veterans Affairs, would not elaborate on what the potential consequences would be.

[soulflower]

The phrase the enemy of my enemy is my friend is a proverb that advances the concept that because two parties have a common enemy, they can work with each other to advance their common goals. Often described as an Arabic proverb.

That's true sometimes but in this case, Saddam hated Iran and Syria more than the US. No way he would've cooperated with Assad...

[dsummoner]

Eventually, someone will realize that the 'weapons were moved to Syria' was the employment of rhetorical technique to undercut the contention of competency of the USIC.

[Wizard777]

The phrase the enemy of my enemy is my friend is a proverb that advances the concept that because two parties have a common enemy, they can work with each other to advance their common goals. Often described as an Arabic proverb.

That's exactly how the USSR put us in this current mess with Al Qaida and Israel. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Congress is too stupid to understand that when that enemy no longer exists they are no longer your friend. Kruschev is rolling in his grave laughing his arse off.