Is it going to take CBS style faked memos to remind people that Saddam Hussein was obsessed with WMD?
WASHINGTON (AP) — Saddam Hussein was obsessed with his status in the Arab world, dreaming of weapons of mass destruction to pump up his prestige. And even as the United States fixated on him, he was fixated on his neighboring enemy, Iran.
That is the picture that emerges from interrogations of the former Iraqi leader since his capture last December, according to the final report of the chief U.S. arms inspector, which gives a first glimpse into what the United States has gleaned about Saddam’s hopes, dreams and insecurities.
The report suggests that Saddam tried to improve relations with the United States in the 1990s, yet basked in his standing as the only leader to stand up to the world’s superpower.
It says Saddam was determined that if Iran was to acquire nuclear weapons, so was Iraq.
[Read the rest]I’m sure this won’t get much play in the mainstream press…
I’m guessing the line (probably at the debate on Friday night) will be: ‘we’ve found no stockpiles of WMD’s inside Sadaam’s head.’
I heard somebody today say that we found no WMD and that this is bad because it means we were wrong to go to war.
It struck me as odd. Because I think the fact that we found no WMD is good because it means we got there in time.
Are there really folks out there who think that Saddam was just a nice old man with no particular intentions toward anybody? Are there really people who can say the name “Saddam” without also using the words “world-threatening psychopath?”
One of the things mentioned in the report is the Oil-for-Food program. According to the CIA, the head of this UN program was as crooked as they come. Also bribes were paid to the French, Russians and others. Why isn’t Kofi Annan standing in front of TV cameras talking about the illegal actions of these people. Nope. He’s too busy taking swipes at the USA. It’s time to revamp the United Nations. It’s a corrupt institution. Bush should bring this up during the debate. Afterall, it’s Kerry’s goal to leave our national security in the hands of the United Nations and the French. The heck with revamping it, I say bulldoze it into Manhattan’s East River.
Let’s face it…the liberal media is against America…it actively works to undermine our war on terror…through their lens, every war is seen as something wrong…
We must defeat the liberal media…we must bring it down…
I’m sure this won’t get much play in the mainstream press …
Kevin: I don’t want to overstate this, but we should all be embiggened by the fact that blogs like yours take stories that would otherwise be ignored for partisan reasons and they force them into the mainstream.
Saddam is not just obsessed with wmd, he’s also obsessed with himself. He still thinks he’s President of Iraq and the only one who can make Iraqi law. the guy is a danger. Some one said that Saddam, all by himself, is a weapon of mass destruction, and we’re proving it every day that we find something new over in Iraq. These people need to be dealt with quickly and end their reign of terror, their law, their beliefs, swiftly before they contaminate our lives temporarily and/or permantly in our society.
~C
The main point I see is that Saddam tried and succeded in making the world believe that he had WMD’s. Now an analogy, when I was young (about 21) I worked in a drive in grocery. Three would be robbers walked in at about closing time. One had a paper bag with the bottom tore out and a gun in the bag. When he pointed the bag (with the gun inside) and told me to open the cash drawer and give him the money I did as he said. OOPs – there just happened to be two police officers in the back with shotguns. When the police rushed out and told the man to stop and drop the weapon, (he assumed that there was a weapon in the bag) the gunman turned and pointed the bag/gun at the officer, bad choice, the officer shot him in the head. Now let us assume, for I do not for a fact, that the gun was not loaded or that it was a toy, do you prosecute the police for murder? hell no. The same with Saddam he made the world believe that he had WMDs and would use them. Now he suffered the consequence. This just proves that we made the right decesion to take out Saddam
Good analogy, Robert. When I was an active cop, a Liberal asked me why cops didn’t wait to see if an assailant was actually going to shoot before opening fire on the sleazebag. My response: get out of my face you idiot. This is how the Liberal mind works. They’re willing to take the chance that the bad guys are bluffing — of course, they’re willing to take that chance with someone else’s life at stake.
Once we bulldoze the UN into the East River the liberal whiners will complain that “all of those nice people lost their jobs”.
Boo hoo.!
Here’s what we do:
1) We build a stadium for whoever wants to play there(Yankees, Jets, Mets…I don’t care!)
2) Harry M Stevens hires the recently unemployed UN workers to sell hotdogs in the stands–a task I am reasonably sure they will be qualified for….
Great plan, Moseby. I bet if you hire Muslims to work there, the city would sell you the land for pennies on the dollar like they did in Boston.
But you’d still have to watch the Mets…..
nice job Robert..
that’s a good message to send to the rest of these tin pot dictators, even if your faking WMD’s we’ll take you out. I’m not so sure Saddam didn’t have them and they are not in Syria or someplace… I would also not take the bet he didn’t help with 9-11, i don’t care what the dems/media say or how many times they say it.. it’s not a chance we should be willing to take ever again. If your a publicly avowed enemy of the US and could be working with terrorists to give them weapons you might have that’s enough dots for me to connect !
He may have been obsessed with them… but he didn’t have them. Even Rummy has admitted it.
A newly released document from President George W. Bush