The World Awaits the Revealing of Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction
News From The Front | 09.06.2003 14:16
Serious ethical questions are now being raised that Bush administration's intelligence seems to have been either faulty or manipulated.
CHICAGO (NFTF.org) -- Weeks after Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq collapsed, there are still no signs of his alleged weapons of mass destruction. Before the invasion of Iraq by the United States, the Bush administration claimed that they had specific intelligence proving that Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. For example, on October 7, 2002, the President stated in a speech in Ohio: "The Iraqi regime ... possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons." The President continued, "Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past."
Yet serious ethical questions are now being raised since the Bush administration's intelligence seems to have been either faulty or manipulated.
There are still no signs of Iraq's biological weapons materials capable of producing "over 25,000 liters of anthrax," as President Bush accused in his State of the Union Address. There are also no signs of Saddam Hussein's materials capable of producing "more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin."
Doubts have been raised on U.S. "intelligence officials [who] estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
The President also stated that "U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents." The President argued that "Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions."
Other than these accusations, the President argued that the "British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." But this report turned out to be fraudulent and forged.
The President also argued that Iraq has "attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." Yet the IAEA and the U.N. has refuted these claims, saying that the tubes could only be used for rockets, and not in the creation of nuclear weapons.
The main justification for the war in Iraq was that Saddam Hussein was preparing weapons of mass destruction that could be used against the United States and its allies; as of now, the world is still waiting for these weapons to be revealed.
Yet serious ethical questions are now being raised since the Bush administration's intelligence seems to have been either faulty or manipulated.
There are still no signs of Iraq's biological weapons materials capable of producing "over 25,000 liters of anthrax," as President Bush accused in his State of the Union Address. There are also no signs of Saddam Hussein's materials capable of producing "more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin."
Doubts have been raised on U.S. "intelligence officials [who] estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
The President also stated that "U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents." The President argued that "Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions."
Other than these accusations, the President argued that the "British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." But this report turned out to be fraudulent and forged.
The President also argued that Iraq has "attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." Yet the IAEA and the U.N. has refuted these claims, saying that the tubes could only be used for rockets, and not in the creation of nuclear weapons.
The main justification for the war in Iraq was that Saddam Hussein was preparing weapons of mass destruction that could be used against the United States and its allies; as of now, the world is still waiting for these weapons to be revealed.
News From The Front
Homepage:
www.NFTF.org
Comments
Hide the following 3 comments
What Would You Do?
09.06.2003 15:19
2. Your country possesses weapons of mass destruction.
3. a foreign power launches a full scale invasion of your country.
What would you do?
Curious
Blowing in the wind of security
09.06.2003 17:35
Agencies
Monday June 9, 2003
North Korea today made its first official admission that it intended to build up a "nuclear deterrent" in a further escalation of its stand-off with the United States.
The North's official KCNA news agency said Pyongyang was willing to ease US concerns over its nuclear programme if Washington changed its stance towards it.
"But if the US keeps threatening the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea] with nukes instead of abandoning its hostile policy toward Pyongyang, the DPRK will have no option but to build up a nuclear deterrent force," it said.
According to an account of the talks revealed to CNN, Kang Suk-ju, Pyonyang's second most-powerful official, told the US diplomat James Kelly something to the effect of: "Your president called us a member of the axis of evil ... Your troops are deployed on the Korean peninsula ... Of course, we have a nuclear programme."
Obviously
To Curious
09.06.2003 23:01
The USA, a despotic government does, all the time.
Errrr....