Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 40

Thread: Neo Cons...How do you like your Crow?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    Isn't this the report some of you (and you know who you are) were waiting for before they'd admit they were wrong about Iraq's WMD's capability before the U.S. invasion in 2003?

    October 6, 2004
    [b]U.S. Report Finds Iraq Was Minimal Weapons Threat in '03[/b]
    By DOUGLAS JEHL

    WASHINGTON, Oct. 6 Iraq now appears to have destroyed its stockpiles of illicit weapons within months of the Persian Gulf war of 1991, and by the time of the American invasion in spring 2003, its capacity to produce such weapons was continuing to erode, the top American inspector in Iraq said in a report made public today.

    The report by Charles A. Dulfer said the last Iraqi factory capable of producing militarily significant quantities of unconventional weapons was destroyed in 1996. The finding amounted to the starkest portrayal yet of a vast gap between the Bush administration's prewar assertions about Iraqi weapons and what a 15-month postinvasion inquiry by American investigators has concluded were the facts on the ground.

    [b]At the time of the American invasion, Mr. Duelfer concluded, Iraq had not possessed military-scale stockpiles of illicit weapons for a dozen years and was not actively seeking to produce them.[/b]

    The White House had portrayed the war as a bid to disarm Iraq of unconventional weapons, and had invoked images of mushroom clouds, deadly gases and fearsome poisons. But Mr. Duelfer concluded that even if Iraq had sought to restart its weapons programs in 2003, it could not have produced significant quantities of chemical weapons for at least a year, and would have required years to produce a nuclear weapon.

    "Over time he was getting further away from nuclear weapons," an official familiar with the report said of Saddam Hussein in advance of the public release of Mr. Duelfer's report. "He was further away in 2003 than he was in 1991. The nuclear program was decaying rather than being preserved."

    Mr. Duelfer presented his conclusions to Congress today, beginning with a closed-testimony session before the Senate Intelligence Committee. But his findings were described to reporters in advance of the testimony, although only on condition that they not to be published until an afternoon appearance by Mr. Duelfer before the Senate Armed Services Committee, when the report was made public.

    The three-volume report, totaling more than 900 pages, is viewed as the first authoritative attempt to unravel the mystery posed by Iraq during the crucial years between the end of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and the American-led war that began in 2003. It adds new weight to what is already a widely accepted view that the most fundamental prewar assertions made by American intelligence agencies about Iraq that it possessed chemical and biological weapons and was reconstituting its nuclear program bore no resemblance to the truth.

    Mr. Duelfer concluded that Mr. Hussein made fundamental decisions, beginning in 1991, to get rid of Iraq's illicit weapons and accept the destruction of its weapons-producing facilities as part of an effort to win an end to United Nations sanctions. But Mr. Duelfer argued that Mr. Hussein was also exploiting avenues opened by the sanctions, including the oil-for-food program, to lay the groundwork for a long-term plan to resume weapons production if sanctions were lifted.

    "It was clearly Saddam Hussein's intention to restart his W.M.D. activities when the opportunity arose to do so," the official familiar with the report said of Mr. Duelfer's findings, using an abbreviation for weapons of mass destruction. But that conclusion, the official acknowledged, was based more on inference than solid evidence. Mr. Duelfer did not find concrete evidence of such a plan, the official said, though he argued that the nature of the Iraqi regime had made it extraordinary unlikely that such a blueprint would have been committed to paper.

    The report was based in part on the interrogation of Mr. Hussein in his prison cell outside Baghdad. Mr. Duelfer said he had concluded that Mr. Hussein had deliberately sought to maintain an ambiguity about whether Iraq possessed illicit weapons in a strategy aimed as much at Iran, with whom Iraq fought an eight-year war in the 1990's, as at the United States.

    Mr. Duelfer's report said that American investigators had found clandestine laboratories used by the Iraqi Intelligence Service to produce small quantities of ricin, a poison made from castor beans. It said those laboratories were active at the time of the American invasion in 2003. But as was previously reported, the Duelfer inquiry concluded that those laboratories appeared intended for use in developing agents for use in assassinations, not to inflict mass casualties.

    Mr. Duelfer said in his report that Mr. Hussein never acknowledged in the course of the interrogations what had become of Iraq's illicit weapons. He said that American investigators had appealed to the former Iraqi leader to be candid in order to shape his legacy, but that Mr. Hussein had not been forthcoming.

    The official familiar with the report said that interviews with other former top Iraqi leaders had made clear that Mr. Hussein had left many of his top deputies uncertain until the eve of war about whether Iraq possessed illicit weapons. The official said that Mr. Hussein seemed to fear a new attack by Iran, whose incursions into Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88 were fended off by Baghdad only with the use of chemical munitions fired on ballistic missiles.

    Mr. Duelfer said in the report that Iraq took conscious effort to maintain the knowledge base necessary to restart an illicit weapons program. He said that Iraq had essentially put its biological program "on the shelf" after its last production facility was destroyed by United Nations inspectors in 1996, and could have begun to produce biological questions in as little as a month if it had restarted its weapons program in 1996.

    The report will almost certainly be the last complete assessment by the team led by Mr. Duelfer, which is known as the Iraq Survey Group. But Mr. Duelfer said that he and the 1,200-member team would continue their work in Iraq for the time being. He said that the team had not completely ruled out the possibility that some Iraqi weapons might have been smuggled out of Iraq to a neighboring country, such as Syria.

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    574
    Post Thanks / Like
    They had the money to purchase the capability to manufacture the money to purchase the capability of manufacturing or something...

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    Condoleeza sure has some hair issues, doesn't she?

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'll read the entire report and then comment.

    He was definitely making cookies....

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:20 PM
    [b] I'll read the entire report and then comment.

    [/b][/quote]
    Don't wait too long...you wouldn't want your serving of crow to get cold would you?

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:20 PM
    [b] I'll read the entire report and then comment.

    He was definitely making cookies.... [/b][/quote]
    5ever's new slogan: he wasn't making cookies... but he planning to!

    well worth hundreds of billions of dollars and over 1000 US servicemen - what a joke :blink:

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:27 PM
    [b] well worth hundreds of billions of dollars and over 1000 US servicemen - what a joke [/b][/quote]
    Actually its tragic.

    Bush should've just had the good grace not to seek re-election errrrrr re-selection and just withdrawn his candidacy. The same way Lyndon Johnson did.

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,848
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't understand this new found separation from reality Democrats have.

    Wasn't Kerry & Edwards beating the Iraq war drum as loudly as Bush? Didn't they both vote FOR the war in Iraq?

    I don't get it.


    [url]www.votenader.org[/url]

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by AlbanyJet[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I don't understand this new found separation from reality Democrats have.

    Wasn't Kerry & Edwards beating the Iraq war drum as loudly as Bush? Didn't they both vote FOR the war in Iraq?

    I don't get it.


    [/b][/quote]
    I was always against the Iraq war. I've always felt it was a fool's errand.

    Right now were faced with a choice its either...

    More of the same = Bush/Cheney

    or

    A new beginning = Kerry/Edwards


    I'm choosing a new beginning.

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by valleyjet+Oct 6 2004, 02:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (valleyjet @ Oct 6 2004, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-AlbanyJet[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I don&#39;t understand this new found separation from reality Democrats have.

    Wasn&#39;t Kerry & Edwards beating the Iraq war drum as loudly as Bush? Didn&#39;t they both vote FOR the war in Iraq?

    I don&#39;t get it.


    [/b][/quote]
    I was always against the Iraq war. I&#39;ve always felt it was a fool&#39;s errand.

    Right now were faced with a choice its either...

    More of the same = Bush/Cheney

    or

    A new beginning = Kerry/Edwards


    I&#39;m choosing a new beginning. [/b][/quote]
    Good luck with that choice. The real crow is what you&#39;ll be eating on election day when jean francois and Johnny slip and fall give their concesion speeches.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by chiefst2000[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:41 PM
    [b] Good luck with that choice. The real crow is what you&#39;ll be eating on election day when jean francois and Johnny slip and fall give their concesion speeches. [/b][/quote]
    So is it fair to assume you like war, death, isolation, record national debt and a lagging economy?

    On the other hand that would explain your support for Bush/Cheney.

  12. #12
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,848
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by valleyjet+Oct 6 2004, 02:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (valleyjet @ Oct 6 2004, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-AlbanyJet[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I don&#39;t understand this new found separation from reality Democrats have.

    Wasn&#39;t Kerry & Edwards beating the Iraq war drum as loudly as Bush? Didn&#39;t they both vote FOR the war in Iraq?

    I don&#39;t get it.


    [/b][/quote]
    I was always against the Iraq war. I&#39;ve always felt it was a fool&#39;s errand.

    Right now were faced with a choice its either...

    More of the same = Bush/Cheney

    or

    A new beginning = Kerry/Edwards


    I&#39;m choosing a new beginning. [/b][/quote]
    No, I respectfully think you&#39;re wrong.

    We&#39;re faced with more of the same from Bush OR Kerry&#33;


    [url]www.votenader.org[/url]

  13. #13
    All League
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    574
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by AlbanyJet[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I don&#39;t understand this new found separation from reality Democrats have.

    Wasn&#39;t Kerry & Edwards beating the Iraq war drum as loudly as Bush? Didn&#39;t they both vote FOR the war in Iraq?

    I don&#39;t get it.


    [url]www.votenader.org[/url] [/b][/quote]
    Again, they voted for the president to have the authorization to go to war if necessary. You can read the statement in the post titled factcheck.org...

  14. #14
    All Pro
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,282
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by valleyjet+Oct 6 2004, 03:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (valleyjet @ Oct 6 2004, 03:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-AlbanyJet[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I don&#39;t understand this new found separation from reality Democrats have.

    Wasn&#39;t Kerry & Edwards beating the Iraq war drum as loudly as Bush? Didn&#39;t they both vote FOR the war in Iraq?

    I don&#39;t get it.


    [/b][/quote]
    I was always against the Iraq war. I&#39;ve always felt it was a fool&#39;s errand.

    Right now were faced with a choice its either...

    More of the same = Bush/Cheney

    or

    A new beginning = Kerry/Edwards


    I&#39;m choosing a new beginning. [/b][/quote]
    What depresses me is that out of 250 million people, this is the best the two major parties have to offer. I don&#39;t like any of them, don&#39;t like Nader and have no idea who the Libertarian canidate is.

    I think a strong third party option could have really shaken things up this year, and at least opened the eyes of the powers that be in the Republican and Democratic parties that we are tired of voting against their canidates, and want someone to vote for.

  15. #15
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,848
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by 4th&Long+Oct 6 2004, 02:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (4th&Long @ Oct 6 2004, 02:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-AlbanyJet[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:33 PM
    [b] I don&#39;t understand this new found separation from reality Democrats have.

    Wasn&#39;t Kerry & Edwards beating the Iraq war drum as loudly as Bush? Didn&#39;t they both vote FOR the war in Iraq?

    I don&#39;t get it.


    [url]www.votenader.org[/url] [/b][/quote]
    Again, they voted for the president to have the authorization to go to war if necessary. You can read the statement in the post titled factcheck.org... [/b][/quote]
    Sorry, VJ.

    I don&#39;t buy it&#33;

    Kerry is equally to blame as Bush with regard to the mess in Iraq. That&#39;s why I don&#39;t understand this &#39;separation&#39; you Democrats have recently found.


    [url]www.votenader.org[/url]

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:20 PM
    [b] I&#39;ll read the entire report and then comment.

    [/b][/quote]
    Here you are Tom cat... Happy reading&#33;&#33;&#33;

    I&#39;ll be here to serve up your crow, how do you like it?

    [url=http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/index.html]http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_20...2004/index.html[/url]


    [b][SIZE=4]CHECKMATE&#33;&#33;&#33;[/SIZE][/b]

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by valleyjet+Oct 6 2004, 03:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (valleyjet @ Oct 6 2004, 03:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-jets5ever[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:20 PM
    [b] I&#39;ll read the entire report and then comment.

    [/b][/quote]
    Here you are Tom cat... Happy reading&#33;&#33;&#33;

    I&#39;ll be here to serve up your crow, how do you like it?

    [url=http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/index.html]http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_20...2004/index.html[/url]


    [SIZE=4]CHECKMATE&#33;&#33;&#33;[/SIZE] [/b][/quote]
    Checkmate about what? What are you babbling about?

  18. #18
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,108
    Post Thanks / Like
    anarchism is looking better and better..
    come on..do you make over 200k?
    I don&#39;t..the tax plan of little bush aint gonna help me&#33;

    Don&#39;t be frikking girly men pussies..&#33;
    There is nothing to be afraid of...EVERY president will do their best to protect America...
    choose the candidate who is CLEARLY more intelligent.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    390
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 03:16 PM
    [b] Checkmate about what? [/b][/quote]
    Just read the report you asked for.

    I&#39;ll also rustle up some humble pie for you if you like.

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by valleyjet+Oct 6 2004, 02:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (valleyjet @ Oct 6 2004, 02:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-chiefst2000[/i]@Oct 6 2004, 02:41 PM
    [b] Good luck with that choice. The real crow is what you&#39;ll be eating on election day when jean francois and Johnny slip and fall give their concesion speeches. [/b][/quote]
    So is it fair to assume you like war, death, isolation, record national debt and a lagging economy?

    On the other hand that would explain your support for Bush/Cheney. [/b][/quote]
    Actually I like freedom. But its hard work.. Its hard work... and were working hard.. sometimes we even work on Saturdays... :D

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us