U.S. Report Finds No Evidence of Iraq WMD!!

[FORD]

U.S. Report Finds No Evidence of Iraq WMD

By KEN GUGGENHEIM, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 American lives, the top U.S. arms inspector reported Wednesday that he found no evidence that Iraq produced any weapons of mass destruction after 1991. He also concluded that Saddam Hussein's weapons capability weakened during a dozen years of U.N. sanctions before the U.S. invasion last year.

Contrary to prewar statements by President Bush and top administration officials, Saddam did not have chemical and biological stockpiles when the war began and his nuclear capabilities were deteriorating, not advancing, according to the report by Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group.

Duelfer's findings come less than four weeks before an election in which Bush's handling of Iraq has become the central issue. Democratic candidate John Kerry has seized on comments this week by the former U.S. administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, that the United States didn't have enough troops in Iraq to prevent a breakdown in security after Saddam was toppled.

The inspector's report could boost Kerry's contention that Bush rushed to war based on faulty intelligence and that sanctions and U.N. weapons inspectors should have been given more time.

But Duelfer also supports Bush's argument that Saddam remained a threat. Interviews with the toppled leader and other former Iraqi officials made clear to inspectors that Saddam had not lost his ambition to pursue weapons of mass destruction and hoped to revive his weapons program if U.N. sanctions were lifted, the report said.

"There was a risk, a real risk, that Saddam Hussein would pass weapons or materials or information to terrorist networks," Bush said in a campaign speech in Wilkes Barre, Pa., defending the decision to invade. "In the world after Sept. 11, that was a risk we could not afford to take."

But a top Democrat in Congress, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, said Duelfer's findings undercut the two main arguments for war: that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he would share them with terrorists like al-Qaida.

"We did not go to war because Saddam had future intentions to obtain weapons of mass destruction," Levin said.

Traveling in Africa, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Wednesday that the report shows that Saddam was "doing his best" to get around the United Nations' sanctions. For months, Blair has been trying to defend his justification for joining the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in the face of heavy criticism from some in his own party.

Duelfer presented his findings in a report of more than 1,000 pages, and in appearances before Senate committees.

The report avoids direct comparisons with prewar claims by the Bush administration on Iraq's weapons systems. But Duelfer largely reinforces the conclusions of his predecessor, David Kay, who said in January, "We were almost all wrong" on Saddam's weapons programs. The White House did not endorse Kay's findings then, noting that Duelfer's team was continuing to search for weapons.

Duelfer found that Saddam, hoping to end U.N. sanctions, gradually began ending prohibited weapons programs starting in 1991. But as Iraq started receiving money through the U.N. oil-for-food program in the late 1990s, and as enforcement of the sanctions weakened, Saddam was able to take steps to rebuild his military, such as acquiring parts for missile systems.

However, the erosion of sanctions stopped after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Duelfer found, preventing Saddam from pursuing weapons of mass destruction.

Duelfer's team found no written plans by Saddam's regime to pursue banned weapons if U.N. sanctions were lifted. Instead, the inspectors based their findings that Saddam hoped to reconstitute his programs on interviews with Saddam after his capture, as well as talks with other top Iraqi officials.

The inspectors found Saddam was particularly concerned about the threat posed by Iran, the country's enemy in a 1980-88 war. Saddam said he would meet Iran's threat by any means necessary, which Duelfer understood to mean weapons of mass destruction.

Saddam believed the use of chemical weapons against Iran prevented Iraq's defeat in that war. He also was prepared to use such weapons in 1991 if the U.S.-led coalition had tried to topple him in the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Tuesday that Saddam "had the intent and capability" to build weapons of mass destruction, and that he was "a gathering threat that needed to be taken seriously, that it was a matter of time before he was going to begin pursuing those weapons of mass destruction."

But before the war, the Bush administration cast Saddam as an immediate threat, not a gathering threat who would begin pursuing weapons in the future.

For example, Bush said in October 2002 that "Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more." Bush also said then, "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program."

Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said Wednesday that Duelfer's findings showed there is "no evidence whatsoever of the threats we were warned about." He spoke after Duelfer gave a closed-door briefing to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said Duelfer showed Iraq's ability to produce weapons of mass destruction had degraded since 1998. But Roberts called the report inconclusive on what happened to weapons stockpiles Saddam is believed to have once possessed.

Interviews with Saddam left Duelfer's team with the impression that Saddam was more concerned about Iran and Israel as enemies than he was about the United States. Saddam appeared to hold out hope that U.S. leaders would ultimately recognize that it was in the country's interest to deal with Iraq as an important, secular, oil-rich Middle Eastern nation, the report found.

The Iraq Survey Group will continue operations and may prepare smaller reports on issues that remain unresolved, including whether weapons had been smuggled out of Iraq and about intelligence that Saddam had mobile biological weapons labs.

___

On the Net:

Key findings from the report are available at:

http://wid.ap.org/documents/iraq/041006keyfinding

[ODShowtime]

Man I was just gonna post this. Explain away folks.

[Mezro]

Just heard this on NPR. Where did the WMD's go?

Mezro...Oh, that's right, he used them all up on the Kurds...

[Warham]

'Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said Duelfer showed Iraq's ability to produce weapons of mass destruction had degraded since 1998. But Roberts called the report inconclusive on what happened to weapons stockpiles Saddam is believed to have once possessed.'

An interesting comment, no doubt. What did happen to those stockpiles?

[Warham]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
Man I was just gonna post this. Explain away folks.

This one will be easier to explain than Kerry's Senate record.

[diamondD]

John Kerry believed the same intelligence.

[FORD]

Originally posted by diamondD
John Kerry believed the same intelligence.

Not exactly.....

Both houses of congress routinely see more intelligence than the average American, but the executive branch, particularly the BCE, with lifelong ties to the intelligence agencies themselves - had additional sources that Congress never saw.

Some of these "sources" like Chalabi, for example, and the PNAC reports, never had an ounce of credibility to begin with, and were only advancing their own agendas. Other intelligence was ridiculously out of date, like the reports of alleged WMD facilities that the British plagarized from a college term paper written in 1991.

[Big Train]

How many times are we gonna go through this?

First off, chemical weapons can be made quickly and easily. So easily in fact, there were several mobile weapons labs in Iraq (remains of a few flatbed labs have been found), which Iraqi scientists themselves have come forward to say is true. Iraq is a sandbox the size of Texas. Because this guy didn't find anything does not mean that there were none to begin with. In a sandbox that size, he could have buried them anywhere. Or another likely theory, he shipped them over the border.

Given the time frame which we announced that we would be coming, to the time we set up, to the time we rolled the country, there was PLENTY of time for him to ship or dispose whatever he had. I believe in time we will find them.

[Mezro]

Originally posted by Big Train
I believe in time we will find them.

The only WMD they'll find is Dick Cheney's ass.

Mezro..."come on kids; squeeze my tummy and I'll make mustard gas!"...

[Big Train]

Let's just hope we don't discover them in tragic circumstances..such as citizens discovering it in their drinking water

[FORD]

Originally posted by Big Train
Let's just hope we don't discover them in tragic circumstances..such as citizens discovering it in their drinking water

Citizens where??

If anything turns up in the water here, it won't be from the Iraqis. Just like that Anthrax, which conveniently took out the tabloid publisher who printed this now infamous picture of the Bushettes....

http://www.bushspeaks.com/img/jenna_falling.jpg

.....which was determined to come directly from a DOD laboratory.

[JCOOK]

How long have the voices been talking to you Ford?

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Big Train
Let's just hope we don't discover them in tragic circumstances..such as citizens discovering it in their drinking water

Train, I used to be scared of this, but it takes a SHITLOAD of chemicals to contaminate a water supply to hazardous levels. Like numerous dumptruck loads.

[DLR'sCock]

Maybe the repukes need Ronald Reagan to come back from the dead and tell them that there were no WMD's when we invaded Iraq??? Would they believe it then???? I mean he's dead Right???? He might know???? Huh????I bet he talks to God all of the time....right???
But is he comes back from the dead, does that make Reagan Jesus???

[Warham]

I kinda like that pic. :D

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Warham
I kinda like that pic. :D

looks to me like the one is humpin' the other's leg

[Big Train]

That is just one possibility...discount it all you like. Let's just hope it isn't tragic....

[DLR'sCock]

Well GWB's spawn or not, I would bang both of them, a threeseome would be fun!

[ELVIS]

The WMD's were shipped out of the country...

[Lqskdiver]

Originally posted by FORD
U.S. Report Finds No Evidence of Iraq WMD

By KEN GUGGENHEIM, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 American lives, the top U.S. arms inspector reported Wednesday that he found no evidence that Iraq produced any weapons of mass destruction after 1991. He also concluded that Saddam Hussein's weapons capability weakened during a dozen years of U.N. sanctions before the U.S. invasion last year.

Contrary to prewar statements by President Bush and top administration officials, Saddam did not have chemical and biological stockpiles when the war began and his nuclear capabilities were deteriorating, not advancing, according to the report by Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group.

Duelfer's findings come less than four weeks before an election in which Bush's handling of Iraq has become the central issue. Democratic candidate John Kerry has seized on comments this week by the former U.S. administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, that the United States didn't have enough troops in Iraq to prevent a breakdown in security after Saddam was toppled.

The inspector's report could boost Kerry's contention that Bush rushed to war based on faulty intelligence and that sanctions and U.N. weapons inspectors should have been given more time.


But Duelfer also supports Bush's argument that Saddam remained a threat. Interviews with the toppled leader and other former Iraqi officials made clear to inspectors that Saddam had not lost his ambition to pursue weapons of mass destruction and hoped to revive his weapons program if U.N. sanctions were lifted, the report said.



"There was a risk, a real risk, that Saddam Hussein would pass weapons or materials or information to terrorist networks," Bush said in a campaign speech in Wilkes Barre, Pa., defending the decision to invade. "In the world after Sept. 11, that was a risk we could not afford to take."

But a top Democrat in Congress, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, said Duelfer's findings undercut the two main arguments for war: that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he would share them with terrorists like al-Qaida.

"We did not go to war because Saddam had future intentions to obtain weapons of mass destruction," Levin said.

Traveling in Africa, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Wednesday that the report shows that Saddam was "doing his best" to get around the United Nations' sanctions. For months, Blair has been trying to defend his justification for joining the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in the face of heavy criticism from some in his own party.

Duelfer presented his findings in a report of more than 1,000 pages, and in appearances before Senate committees.

The report avoids direct comparisons with prewar claims by the Bush administration on Iraq's weapons systems. But Duelfer largely reinforces the conclusions of his predecessor, David Kay, who said in January, "We were almost all wrong" on Saddam's weapons programs. The White House did not endorse Kay's findings then, noting that Duelfer's team was continuing to search for weapons.

Duelfer found that Saddam, hoping to end U.N. sanctions, gradually began ending prohibited weapons programs starting in 1991. But as Iraq started receiving money through the U.N. oil-for-food program in the late 1990s, and as enforcement of the sanctions weakened, Saddam was able to take steps to rebuild his military, such as acquiring parts for missile systems.

However, the erosion of sanctions stopped after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Duelfer found, preventing Saddam from pursuing weapons of mass destruction.

Duelfer's team found no written plans by Saddam's regime to pursue banned weapons if U.N. sanctions were lifted. Instead, the inspectors based their findings that Saddam hoped to reconstitute his programs on interviews with Saddam after his capture, as well as talks with other top Iraqi officials.

The inspectors found Saddam was particularly concerned about the threat posed by Iran, the country's enemy in a 1980-88 war. Saddam said he would meet Iran's threat by any means necessary, which Duelfer understood to mean weapons of mass destruction.

Saddam believed the use of chemical weapons against Iran prevented Iraq's defeat in that war. He also was prepared to use such weapons in 1991 if the U.S.-led coalition had tried to topple him in the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Tuesday that Saddam "had the intent and capability" to build weapons of mass destruction, and that he was "a gathering threat that needed to be taken seriously, that it was a matter of time before he was going to begin pursuing those weapons of mass destruction."

But before the war, the Bush administration cast Saddam as an immediate threat, not a gathering threat who would begin pursuing weapons in the future.

For example, Bush said in October 2002 that "Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more." Bush also said then, "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program."

Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said Wednesday that Duelfer's findings showed there is "no evidence whatsoever of the threats we were warned about." He spoke after Duelfer gave a closed-door briefing to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said Duelfer showed Iraq's ability to produce weapons of mass destruction had degraded since 1998. But Roberts called the report inconclusive on what happened to weapons stockpiles Saddam is believed to have once possessed.

Interviews with Saddam left Duelfer's team with the impression that Saddam was more concerned about Iran and Israel as enemies than he was about the United States. Saddam appeared to hold out hope that U.S. leaders would ultimately recognize that it was in the country's interest to deal with Iraq as an important, secular, oil-rich Middle Eastern nation, the report found.

The Iraq Survey Group will continue operations and may prepare smaller reports on issues that remain unresolved, including whether weapons had been smuggled out of Iraq and about intelligence that Saddam had mobile biological weapons labs.

___

On the Net:

Key findings from the report are available at:

http://wid.ap.org/documents/iraq/041006keyfinding


Old news...this was actually expected since last night. And the fact that we still don't have stockpiles kinda makes this report moot. Just useless ammo for Democrats.


But noticed my highlights...he still intended to make weapons if resolutions were removed.

Some Senator from Cali said "Intentions does constitute danger"

WHAT THE FUCK!!!

Are you stupid, lady!! Were you not here on 9/11/01?!?!

If someone is building nukular weapons it's because they intend to use them!!

So what if we didn't find any stockpiles! Good!!

We got there before he could get his shit together and seriously cause problems.

It's called PREVENTION!!

Now we are keeping an eye on Iran! Oh, yeah, the UN is really taking this one seriously...about as serious as it took Saddam!

They can't handle shit and what it's going to come to is WE are going to have to go in there and clean up another fucking mess that the useless UN Security council couldn't handle.

Still think it's up to the UN to handle all wackos??

Here's a clear message on how they handle their foreign affairs:

==========================================

U.N. Warns Cannot Cope if Darfur Violence Continues

25 minutes ago World - Reuters


By Opheera McDoom

KHARTOUM (Reuters) - The United Nations (news - web sites) warned on Wednesday it would not be able to cope if conditions do not improve in Sudan's Darfur region, devastated by violence which has driven more than 1.5 million from their homes.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20041006/wl_nm/sudan_dc


===========================================


That's very reassuring!

:rolleyes:

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by DLR'sCock
Maybe the repukes need Ronald Reagan to come back from the dead and tell them that there were no WMD's when we invaded Iraq??? Would they believe it then???? I mean he's dead Right???? He might know???? Huh????I bet he talks to God all of the time....right???
But is he comes back from the dead, does that make Reagan Jesus???

Shut up you twit. You insult those of faith of all political parties. Go back to smelling mommy's soiled panty hose. :gulp:

[Guitar Shark]

Don't worry BBB, nobody really understood what he was trying to say anyway.

[Mezro]

Originally posted by ELVIS
The WMD's were shipped out of the country...

Via UPS.

Mezro...ask what Brown can do for you...

[sambo]

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me, because as we know, there are known unknowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't know we don't know."

- Donald Rumsfeld

[Lqskdiver]

"It depends upon what the meaning of the word is means. If is means 'is, and never has been', that's one thing. If it means, 'there is none', that was a completely true statement. "

- Bill Clinton

[Jesus Christ]

Originally posted by DLR'sCock
Maybe the repukes need Ronald Reagan to come back from the dead and tell them that there were no WMD's when we invaded Iraq??? Would they believe it then???? I mean he's dead Right???? He might know???? Huh????I bet he talks to God all of the time....right???

There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.


But is he comes back from the dead, does that make Reagan Jesus???

Not likely, My son :)

[ELVIS]

Jesus NEVER referred to another man as his son...

[Jesus Christ]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Jesus NEVER referred to another man as his son...

Gregory, why art thou always troubling thyself with trivialities such as these?

For he who hath seen Me hath seen the Father, and are ye not all His children?

[Sgt Schultz]

This is bad news for Bush. Bush based the ENTIRE rationale for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Husein on WMDs. The fact that they are now not there means Bush lied and there was no reason to invade. We made a mistake toppling Saddam Husein and waging an illegal war against him.

Since we have found no WMDs I call on all Democrats to join with me and call for the immediate release and reinstatment of Saddam Hussein as President of Iraq and for him to be compensated for the deaths of his sons. After Saddam has been put back in power the U.S. should suspend the no-fly zones and the UN should lift all sanctions. The U.S. should also compensate Iraq for waging war against her.

The U.S. should also be responsible to help Iraq dismantle democratic reforms and to help reform and rebuild Saddam's security apparatus and to help arrest all political prisoners or any others Saddam may deem as enemies of the state.

At the UN all former resolutions against Iraq should be repealed and new resolutions should be discussed regarding Iraq's territorial rights regarding Kuwait.

The Democrats have been vindicated in their opposition to the war in Iraq so I call on everyone to support them in this effort to bring back the legitimate President of Iraq who was toppled in an illegal war.

[Guitar Shark]

Nice post! But surely you can see that there's more to it, senor Schultz. ;)

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
This is bad news for Bush. Bush based the ENTIRE rationale for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Husein on WMDs. The fact that they are now not there means Bush lied and there was no reason to invade. We made a mistake toppling Saddam Husein and waging an illegal war against him.

No, don't forget he also said that Saddam had ties to Al Qeada and insinuated that he had a hand in 9-11.

[Sgt Schultz]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
No, don't forget he also said that Saddam had ties to Al Qeada and insinuated that he had a hand in 9-11.

That's right, Saddam had absolutely NO ties to al Qeada - or any other terrorist organizations. The 9/11 commission confirms thisright?. I'm sure all of us have read this report and unanimous, bi-partisan Senate intelligence committe findings too, right? He also did not fund any Palestinian suicide bombers. And let's all remember how explicitly George Bush said that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attacks - we all remember that!

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
And let's all remember how explicitly George Bush said that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attacks - we all remember that!



No, don't forget he also said that Saddam had ties to Al Qeada and insinuated that he had a hand in 9-11.

No one's arguing that he hadn't funded families of Palestinian suicide bombers.

[ODShowtime]

What are you getting at? It doesn't matter that bush&friends lied and misled the public?

[Sgt Schultz]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
What are you getting at? It doesn't matter that bush&friends lied and misled the public?

America attacked, 3,000 dead, 1 trillion dollars lost as result - Bush didn't connect the dots! Bush was asleep at the wheel!! Harrumph harrumph!!

Intelligence services of the U.S., Britain, France and others say dangerous middle east dictator, already responsible for 1,000,000+ deaths and known producer and USER of WMDs is again producing them, CIA director says that case of WMDs in Iraq a "slam dunk", you topple aforementioned dictator and liverate 25+ million. Yet, no WMDs YET found - Bush lied!! Harrumph harrumph!!

Can't have it both ways people. Just admit it, it's all about defeating Bush. Whatever Bush did or didn't do = wrong.

[Sgt Schultz]

Here is what is also in the report the Democrats are so gleeful about..................


Duelfer: Saddam Kept Nuke Program in Place

Press coverage of the report to Congress by Iraq Survey Group (ISG) chief Charles Duelfer yesterday has focused on what the U.S. didn't find in Iraq during it's 18-month search for weapons of mass destruction.

Paraphrasing Duelfer's report, for instance, the New York Times states categorically: "[Saddam] Hussein ended his nuclear program in 1991 and there was no evidence he tried to restart it."

But that's only part of the story as far as Saddam's nuclear ambitions went.

While Duelfer says he found no evidence of a "concerted effort" by Saddam to press ahead with his nuclear program after 1991, his report makes it clear that the program itself was was never abandoned.

In fact, what Duelfer actually says is that Saddam's nuclear program was on hold - in a state of suspended animation - with scientists, nuclear equipment and raw materials standing by awaiting the green light from the Iraqi dictator.

Here are a few quotes taken directly from Duelfer's findings that didn't make it into coverage by the Times, Washington Post and other big media outlets.

"Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability - in an incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks. ..."

"Baghdad undertook a variety of measures to conceal key elements of its nuclear program from successive UN inspectors, including specific direction by Saddam Husayn [Duelfer's spelling] to hide and preserve documentation associated with Iraq’s nuclear program."

"[The Iraq Survey Group], for example, uncovered two specific instances in which scientists involved in uranium enrichment kept documents and technology. Although apparently acting on their own, they did so with the belief and anticipation of resuming uranium enrichment efforts in the future."

"Starting around 1992, in a bid to retain the intellectual core of the former weapons program, Baghdad transferred many nuclear scientists to related jobs in the Military Industrial Commission (MIC). The work undertaken by these scientists at the MIC helped them maintain their weapons knowledge base."

"Initially, Saddam chose to conceal his nuclear program in its entirety, as he did with Iraq’s BW program. Aggressive UN inspections after Desert Storm forced Saddam to admit the existence of the program and destroy or surrender components of the program."

More quotes from the Duelfer report:

"Saddam did express his intent to retain the intellectual capital developed during the Iraqi Nuclear Program. Senior Iraqis - several of them from the Regime’s inner circle - told ISG they assumed Saddam would restart a nuclear program once UN sanctions ended."

"As funding for the MIC and the [Iraq Atomic Energy Commission, or IAEC] increased after the introduction of the Oil-for-Food program, there was some growth in programs that involved former nuclear weapons scientists and engineers."

"The Regime prevented scientists from the former nuclear weapons program from leaving either their jobs or Iraq. Moreover, in the late 1990s, personnel from both MIC and the IAEC received significant pay raises in a bid to retain them, and the Regime undertook new investments in university research in a bid to ensure that Iraq retained technical knowledge."
In his preliminary report to Congress just seven months ago, Duelfer went into detail about some of Saddam's suspected nuclear equipment:


"In the nuclear arena, the ISG has developed information that suggests Iraqi interest in preserving and expanding the knowledge needed to design and develop nuclear weapons. One significant effort illustrating this was a high-speed rail gun program under the direction of two senior scientists associated with Iraq’s pre-1991 nuclear weapons program."

"Documents found outside [one] laboratory described a high-voltage switch that can be used to detonate a nuclear weapon, laser detonation, nuclear fusion, radiation measurement, and radiation safety."

"It is this combination of topics that makes us suspect this lab was intentionally focused on research applicable for nuclear weapons development," Duelfer concluded.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
Can't have it both ways people. Just admit it, it's all about defeating Bush. Whatever Bush did or didn't do = wrong.

Schultz, Bush made some terrible decisions and many people have paid the price. Validating theses decisions by re-electing him will only make it worse. He didn't listen to his advisors when he should have.

[Sgt Schultz]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
Schultz, Bush made some terrible decisions and many people have paid the price. Validating theses decisions by re-electing him will only make it worse. He didn't listen to his advisors when he should have.

So which advisors should he have listend to and which should he have ignored?

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Sgt Schultz
So which advisors should he have listend to and which should he have ignored?

Good question. My statement comes from reading numerous articles. I'll try to get back to you on this.

[Sgt Schultz]

Saddam threat 'greater than feared' Oct 6 2004

A key report on Saddam Hussein's weapons shows he was an even greater threat than previously thought, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has said.

The group hunting for the dictator's weapons of mass destruction is expected to announce it has found no evidence of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

But Mr Straw said the Iraq Survey Group report proves "in terms of his intention", Saddam was an "even starker" threat than thought.

Mr Straw said Saddam would have built up WMDs if he had not been ousted from power.

Speaking on a trip to Baghdad, he said: "I personally am in no doubt whatever that had we walked away from Iraq and left Iraq to Saddam, Saddam would have indeed built up his capabilities, built up his strength and posed an even greater threat to the people of Iraq and the people of the region than before."

The head of the ISG, Charles Duelfer, will set out his findings in his final report to the US Senate tonight.

He is expected to say Saddam did not have WMD at the time of the US-led invasion.

The failure to find WMD will be particularly damaging to the Prime Minister because of his reliance on them as the justification for going to war.

He has already accepted that intelligence suggesting Saddam had WMD was wrong, and he has taken full responsibility for any mistakes in British intelligence.

Link to article (http://icberkshire.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/nationalnews/tm_objectid=14725679&method=full&siteid=50102&headline=saddam-threat--greater-than-feared--name_page.html)