Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The WMD-lite scandal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-28-04 11:43 AM
Original message
The WMD-lite scandal
Whether it was poetic justice or yet one more instance of hubris, in the end there was indeed an "October surprise". Call it the WMD-lite scandal: the disappearance of 380 tons of dual-use explosives in Iraq. Certainly Republican Machiavelli-in-charge Karl Rove didn't see this surprise coming - hitting the Bush administration like a jet converted into a missile. Now the neo-cons and Pentagon civilians are scrambling like mad trying to cover US President George W Bush's back and defuse yet another spectacular blunder.

---

So this is the crucial point in the whole affair: the Pentagon - as well as the IAEA - knew the 380 tons were stored at al-Qaqaa, but US troops didn't make any move to search for them or secure them, because this was not a priority at the time. This week White House spokesman Scott McClellan all but admitted that securing Iraq's oil fields and the Ministry of Oil was a much higher priority than securing 345,000kg (760,000 pounds) of the most powerful non-nuclear explosives around (less than one pound blew up Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland). In itself, this admission blows up the Bush administration's whole case for invading Iraq, weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

There was indeed a "window of opportunity" of less than four weeks between the last IAEA inspection, in early March 2003, and the storming of Baghdad, in early April, when the explosives could have been looted. But Iraqis conclusively deny this possibility. Mohammed al-Sharaa, now in the Science Ministry and someone who worked with UN weapons inspectors under Saddam Hussein, said "it is impossible that these materials could have been taken from this site before the regime's fall". He said he and all other relevant officials had been under orders by Saddam's regime since early March to make sure "not even a shred of paper left the sites".

---

The main Karl Rove-directed administration strategy remains misrepresenting reality to influence people's judgments - and then hurling a barrage of insults. The Bush administration initially ignores any accusation based on facts. Then it brands the accusation - incompetence in al-Qaqaa, for instance - as a lie. Finally it uses its own fabricated lie - or in this case a different excuse every day - to go into character-assassination mode. This is the heart of Bush's delayed - at least by two and a half days - "response" to Senator John Kerry on the al-Qaqaa scandal: "See, our military is now investigating a number of possible scenarios, including this one - that explosives may have been moved before our troops even arrived, even arrived at the site. The investigation is important and ongoing. And a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not the person you want as the commander-in-chief."

Asia Times
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-29-04 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is what happens military objectives
Edited on Fri Oct-29-04 07:15 PM by teryang
...are replaced by corporate CEO objectives. Missing WMD lite is the result of tooth to tail and Army lite fighting for oil fields, pipelines and corporate takeover targets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Martin Eden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-29-04 10:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. Even if the 380 tons were looted before our troops arrived ...
Edited on Fri Oct-29-04 10:04 PM by Martin Eden
... which doesn't seem likely ... the question is:

Why was no attempt made to secure these explosives in March or April of 2003?

The Bush administration was fully informed by the IAEA of the contents of this bunker. If the Pentagon had attempted to secure these explosives at the outset, they wouldn't be scratching their heads now. If they didn't attempt to secure the explosives, it was gross negligence. If they didn't have enough troops to make this bunker an objective, then they didn't send enough troops in the first place to accomplish the mission.

The mission, we were told, was to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of terrorists. There were no chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, and the Bush administration failed to secure the weapons that WERE actually there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC