US calls off search for weapons of mass destruction

by WhyNow2000 193 Replies latest social current

• 

  SixofNine

  David Kay's opinion is that there are no WMD...that's his opinion...some do believe they're there...others think that the WMD are in another country already (me).

  *ahem*

  David Kay's "opinion" is far more informed than your own. David Kaye is a CIA expert living and working the search in Iraq who has the resources of the US military, the CIA, and all past weapons inspectors at his disposal. He was the lead inspector for UNSCUM after Gulf I. If you respect or rank your own opinion as equal to Mr Kay's, then please refrain from any sort of work that might involve advising others, Yeru.

  Here is Mr. Kay's opinion as of this week (excerpted from an interview):

  Q: What happened to the stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons that everyone expected to be there?

  A: "I don't think they existed.

  "I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and those were a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them. I think the best evidence is that they did not resume large-scale production, and that's what we're really talking about, is large stockpiles, not the small. Large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the period after '95."

  Q. After '95?

  A. "We're really talking about from the mid-90s, when people thought they had resumed production."

  Q. What about the nuclear program?

  A. "The nuclear program was as we said in the interim report, I think that will be a final conclusion. There had been some restart of activities, but they were rudimentary.

  "It really wasn't dormant because there were a few little things going on, but it had not resumed in anything meaningful."

  Q: You came away from the hunt that you have done believing that they did not have any large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the country?

  A: "That is correct."

  Q. Is that from the interviews and documentation?

  A. "Well the interviews, the documentation, and the physical evidence of looking at, as hard as it was because they were dealing with looted sites, but you just could not find any physical evidence that supported a larger program."

  Q: Do you think they destroyed it?

  A: "No, I don't think they existed."

  Q. Even though in the mid-1980s people said they used it on Halabja?

  A. "They had stockpiles, they fought the Iranians with it, and they certainly did use it on the Kurds. But what everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last (1991) Gulf War and I don't think there was a large-scale production program in the '90s."
• 

  Yerusalyim

  Six,

  Kays is a science guy who worked for the CIA, not a CIA expert. I admit he does have an informed opinion, but there are others with just as good of credentials say the weapons are there...or actually were there.

  Six, the larger issue I raised in my last post was that if Saddam didn't have weapons or a weapons program he could have easily proven it and none of this would have happened. So, rather than blame faulty US intelligence...blame Saddam.
• 

  Yerusalyim

  Update on what Kay said,
  

  Kay is now saying that there is evidence that weapons were taken to Syria just before the war began.

  Edited to add text and Link:

  http://www.manoramaonline.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=manorama/MmArticle/CommonFullStory&c=MmArticle&channel=News&cid=1074829704662&colid=1002258272837&count=11&p=1002194839100

  London: David Kay, the outgoing leader of a US weapons search team in Iraq, says that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria, a published report said on Sunday.
  
  Kay reportedly told The Sunday Telegraph that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials were moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam. "We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons but we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD (weapons of mass destruction) programme," Kay said in the interview.
  
  "Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved," he added. Syria has denied pursuing weapons of mass destruction and said the long, porous border with Iraq makes it hard to stop infiltrators. US President George W. Bush last month approved the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, which accuses Syria of hosting Palestinian militant groups, such as Hamas and Jihad, and seeking biological and chemical weapons.
• 

  Stacy Smith

  Most people seem to feel that there weren't WMD in Iraq but that instead Saddem led everyone to believe there was. He was looking for respect through fear in the middle east community. Everyone knew that he had no qualms about killing neighbors or even his own people. So by keeping the UN out and suggesting he had such weapons everyone was scared, this is what he wanted.

  But then you have narrow thinkers who believe America is evil, Bush is evil and that the only reason we went there was for oil. Believe what you want and enjoy your milk and medications.
• 

  Pleasuredome

  But then you have narrow thinkers who believe America is evil, Bush is evil and that the only reason we went there was for oil. Believe what you want and enjoy your milk and medications.

  But then you have narrow thinkers who believe Bush is good and that the only reason we went there was to bring "peeance and freeance". Believe what you want. go back to bed, keeping drinking beer and watching Friends.
• 

  Yerusalyim

  Pleasure,

  Until some one shows evidence otherwise I choose to believe that the motives for taking down Iraq were good. Just as with the first Gulf war...there was no Blood for Oil...it didn't happen then, and hasn't happened now.

  People in the news were real quick to point out that David Kay said he didn't believe there were weapons in Iraq, yet hardly anyone is reporting that Kay also stated he's seen evidence suggesting WMD were moved into Syria just before the war...why is that?
• 

  frenchbabyface

  Yeru : Until some one shows evidence ...

  So We need evidence to give you evidences to tell you the US was wrong
  (as far as you didn't prove anything it is your duty to give us evidence PLEASE ... LOL)
  
  but notice that you don't need evidence to go to war ???

  So again You/theUS want to put people under rules you don't even ready to follow yourself. AGAIN AGAIN AGAIN ... but you feel good about that ...
• 

  Yerusalyim

  Frenchy,

  So We need evidence to give you evidences to tell you the US was wrong

  Darlin, go ask the 25 million Iraqis that are now free if the US was wrong...most of them will tell you no, and thank the US for getting rid of Saddam.

  but notice that you don't need evidence to go to war ???

  Evidence to go to war? There was PLENTY of that darlin, EVERY SINGLE intelligence agency in the WORLD said Saddam had WMD...and it's an indisputable fact that he has used them. What there is ZERO evidence of is the US getting in this for oil.

  Darlin, I miss ya. SMOOCHES
• 

  frenchbabyface

  Yeru Sweetheart (Thanks for Darling) ... What can I say ?

  evidence for evidence, their is only one evidence that their was no evidence.
  But maybe they are sneaky to the point to make a difference between evidences and proofs in this matter ?

  I miss you too ... SMOOTCHES !
• 

  Pleasuredome

  Until some one shows evidence otherwise I choose to believe that the motives for taking down Iraq were good

  good. nobody's forcing you to change your mind.

  yet hardly anyone is reporting that Kay also stated he's seen evidence suggesting WMD were moved into Syria just before the war...why is that?

  "material" is too vague. "components of wmd" isnt wmd, and again vague. kay hasnt 'seen' evidence, apparently he was been informed by those that have interrogated former iraqi officials. i'm sure if this information is correct it would make the news as it would support the case for an invasion of syria. so why hasnt it?

  also, why didnt he say this in the first place? surely it would be an important point to make when he resigned, if it were true. why wait until a week later to say it? it also contradicts what he said the previous week about there not being a production program and stockpiles being destroyed. so maybe that is the reason why it hasnt been reported on much. your guess is as good as mine.