The W
Views: 98931770
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
16.9.07 0642
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - The Kay Report Register and log in to post!
(1295 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (14 total)
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2255/4700
EXP: 21494268
For next: 342394

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1232 days
Last activity: 1029 days
#1 Posted on 3.10.03 0855.04
Reposted on: 3.10.10 0859.01
David Kay made his Statement to Congress yesterday. And don't be fooled by the spin the press is turning onto this. It sounds like that the weapons were either there, or they were in the process of destroying them, and that all was concealed.

Kay's conclusions

The ISG has also identified a large volume of material and testimony by cooperating Iraq officials on Iraq's effort to illicitly procure parts and foreign assistance for its missile program. These include:

- Significant level of assistance from a foreign company and its network of affiliates in supplying and supporting the development of production capabilities for solid rocket propellant and dual-use chemicals.

- Entities from another foreign country were involved in supplying guidance and control systems for use in the Al-Fat'h (Ababil-100). The contract was incomplete by the time of OIF due to technical problems with the few systems delivered and a financial dispute.

- A group of foreign experts operating in a private capacity were helping to develop Iraq's liquid propellant ballistic missile RDT&E and production infrastructure. They worked in Baghdad for about three months in late 1998 and subsequently continued work on the project from abroad. An actual contract valued at $10 million for machinery and equipment was signed in June 2001, initially for 18 months, but later extended. This cooperation continued right up until the war.

- A different group of foreign experts traveled to Iraq in 1999 to conduct a technical review that resulted in what became the Al Samoud 2 design, and a contract was signed in 2001 for the provision of rigs, fixtures and control equipment for the redesigned missile.

- Detainees and cooperative sources have described the role of a foreign expert in negotiations on the development of Iraq's liquid and solid propellant production infrastructure. This could have had applications in existing and planned longer range systems, although it is reported that nothing had actually been implemented before OIF.

Uncertainty remains about the full extent of foreign assistance to Iraq's planned expansion of its missile systems and work is continuing to gain a full resolution of this issue. However, there is little doubt from the evidence already gathered that there was substantial illegal procurement for all aspects of the missile programs.

I have covered a lot of ground today, much of it highly technical. Although we are resisting drawing conclusions in this first interim report, a number of things have become clearer already as a result of our investigation, among them:

1. Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Even those senior officials we have interviewed who claim no direct knowledge of any on-going prohibited activities readily acknowledge that Saddam intended to resume these programs whenever the external restrictions were removed. Several of these officials acknowledge receiving inquiries since 2000 from Saddam or his sons about how long it would take to either restart CW production or make available chemical weapons.

2. In the delivery systems area there were already well advanced, but undeclared, on-going activities that, if OIF had not intervened, would have resulted in the production of missiles with ranges at least up to 1000 km, well in excess of the UN permitted range of 150 km. These missile activities were supported by a serious clandestine procurement program about which we have much still to learn.

2. In the chemical and biological weapons area we have confidence that there were at a minimum clandestine on-going research and development activities that were embedded in the Iraqi Intelligence Service. While we have much yet to learn about the exact work programs and capabilities of these activities, it is already apparent that these undeclared activities would have at a minimum facilitated chemical and biological weapons activities and provided a technically trained cadre.



When the weapons are found, a lot of people will have egg on their faces.
Promote this thread!
A-MOL
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 642/777
EXP: 1447254
For next: 38683

Since: 26.6.02
From: York, England

Since last post: 3836 days
Last activity: 3778 days
#2 Posted on 3.10.03 0931.40
Reposted on: 3.10.10 0932.14
We went to war because we were told Saddam was an 'immediate threat to world peace', not 'in a few years, he might have a few weapons'. Forget the anti-war guys putting spin on this - the Kay report is an embarrassment to those who wanted the war.

Remember at the beginning of the year when Blix got ridiculed for finding exactly the same thing?
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 883/1494
EXP: 3931230
For next: 74849

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#3 Posted on 3.10.03 0932.36
Reposted on: 3.10.10 0936.03
It doesn't matter if any "weapons" are found or not. At this point, it's obvious that they were not ready to use. Weapons buried in the ground are not a threat to this nation. Weapons hidden away so well that they can't be found by a nation who has had free reign to go where they please are not a threat to this nation. If a adminstration does not use these weapons to protect its very own existence, under what circumstances WOULD they use these weapons?

I guess there is a slight possibility that the weapons were smuggled out. But what does it say about our intelligence and military if the weapons were smuggled out right under our nose? I have my doubts that this occurred. It also would say that Hussein didn't really care about the existence of his regime, and I have my doubts about that as well.

Now I have no doubts they would produce weapons of a conventional nature with ranges beyond the 150km limit. But that was not really stated as a reason for the war, and once again they would have never produced enough missiles, nor any with enough range, to threaten the U.S. What did they have pre-war, about a dozen missiles? It wasn't many, and they only managed to fire about a half-dozen, hardly the firepower that would seem to need taking down.

I find the Time magazine article that someone posted the other day to be the most believable. The program was mostly imaginary, but needed by Iraqi's to appease Hussein. Since they were fooling Hussein, they were fooling intelligence sources around the world, too.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1395/1759
EXP: 4909398
For next: 83472

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1278 days
Last activity: 44 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on 3.10.03 1245.51
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1246.47
I find it funny as hell that people forget that Bush said Iraq was NOT an imminent threat, but that they would be in the future.

I still find it so amusing that the same people who were all for going into Bosnia for "humanitarian reasons" are the same ones that are so violently opposed to Iraq. Gee- we went in, outsed a brutal, murderous dictator and his regime, and are BUILDING SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS. Damn, we are evil... I can't believe we would dare do something like that! GASP!

This is more than I expected to find at this point... I think, if anything, it is cause to keep looking.

(edited by Pool-Boy on 3.10.03 1048)
Leroy
Boudin blanc
Level: 91

Posts: 189/2263
EXP: 7304406
For next: 164535

Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 11 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#5 Posted on 3.10.03 1328.54
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1328.57
    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    I find it funny as hell that people forget that Bush said Iraq was NOT an imminent threat, but that they would be in the future.

    I still find it so amusing that the same people who were all for going into Bosnia for "humanitarian reasons" are the same ones that are so violently opposed to Iraq. Gee- we went in, outsed a brutal, murderous dictator and his regime, and are BUILDING SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS. Damn, we are evil... I can't believe we would dare do something like that! GASP!

    This is more than I expected to find at this point... I think, if anything, it is cause to keep looking.

    (edited by Pool-Boy on 3.10.03 1048)


He sure as hell gave the impression that they were an imminent threat (from the LA Times, on Bush's State of the Union):

Bush Calls Iraq Imminent Threat

and quoting:

    Originally posted by GW Bush

    "The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not
    accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends
    and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council
    to convene on February the 5th to consider the facts of Iraq's ongoing
    defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present
    information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal
    weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors,
    and its links to terrorist groups."


And quoting from Powell's presentation to the UN:
    Originally posted by Colin Powell


    "We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more. Given Saddam Hussein's history of aggression, given what we know of his grandiose plans, given what we know of his terrorist associations, and given his determination to exact revenge on those who oppose him, should we take the risk that he will not someday use these weapons at a time and a place and in a manner of his choosing, at a time when the world is in a much weaker position to respond?


    The United States will not and cannot run that risk for the American people. Leaving Saddam Hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few more months or years is not an option, not in a post-September 11th world.

    My colleagues, over three months ago, this Council recognized that Iraq continued to pose a threat to international peace and security, and that Iraq had been and remained in material breach of its disarmament obligations.

    Today, Iraq still poses a threat and Iraq still remains in material breach. Indeed, by its failure to seize on its one last opportunity to come clean and disarm, Iraq has put itself in deeper material breach and closer to the day when it will face serious consequences for its continue defiance of this Council."


So whatever - you can play these "he never said that" games all you want - the impression was clear and direct. Iraq had weapons, and intended to use them against the United States. Which was BULLSHIT. Pure and simple. You want to blindly support the President - fine.

And they need hospitals. It's not like were doing them some big favor after bombing the hell out of them for the last 13 years:

Hospitals Struggling In Iraq’s Bloodshed 23 Sept 03

'Lacking so many things,' Iraqi hospitals are barely alive 11 June 03

Rebuilding Iraq's hospitals could take years 23 April 03
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1396/1759
EXP: 4909398
For next: 83472

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1278 days
Last activity: 44 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on 3.10.03 1349.22
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1350.09
You should know by now that the media will place everything Bush related in the worst possible light- and that includes EVERYTHING in Iraq. The fact is we are building schools, and hospitals, and all of the other services they need. We have not been BOMBING HOSPITALS for 13 years. It is a documented fact that unless it was palaces and military, Hussein did not give a rats ass about infastructure, and nothing was built. WE did not ruin their hospital and school systems, HE did. We are fixing it.

And I never blindly support the president. Have a conversation with me about his policy towards illegal immigrants (from Mexico in-particular, and his out-of-control (almost liberal!) spending of late, and you will get a very different story. The fact is that Politics BS aside, the larger picture is that this Iraq War was a good thing in the end. The likes of people like you who blindly OPPOSE the president are incapable of seeing that.
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1752/3273
EXP: 12725443
For next: 365910

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 161 days
Last activity: 161 days
#7 Posted on 3.10.03 1407.27
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1410.47
It has some good things, it has some bad things. But you can't really say that this is the end. I think we're a long ways off before we can consider ourselves 'finished' in Iraq.

-Jag
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1397/1759
EXP: 4909398
For next: 83472

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1278 days
Last activity: 44 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on 3.10.03 1421.54
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1423.45
    Originally posted by Jaguar
    But you can't really say that this is the end. I think we're a long ways off before we can consider ourselves 'finished' in Iraq.

    -Jag


I stand corrected :).
ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 254/641
EXP: 1100162
For next: 56964

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3664 days
Last activity: 3323 days
#9 Posted on 3.10.03 1538.39
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1541.14
We may be building some hospitals in Iraq (after all we did waltz in, bomb the hell out of the place, and just took over. It's the least we can do)

But I'll start taking bets on what happens first...

Rebuld hospitals and provide new medical facilites

or

Rebuild and construct new oil producing facilities

Only time will tell where Bush's priorities lie.

And let's not forget this administration's track record for lies. Now, granted, all politicians lie, but these guys are really bad at it. And it seems that they do it a bit more than others. But I have no real evidence of that.
Leroy
Boudin blanc
Level: 91

Posts: 190/2263
EXP: 7304406
For next: 164535

Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 11 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#10 Posted on 3.10.03 1614.36
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1617.28
    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    You should know by now that the media will place everything Bush related in the worst possible light- and that includes EVERYTHING in Iraq.


Again, I am convinced you get your cable television from Pluto, because that's a steaming load.

They (the "liberal media" that you're so paranoid about) have never asked the important questions, never detailed the sorted past of the Reagan-Bush era ties to Iraq, never fully documented the US support of Hussein up until the late 80's, etc, etc.

Now that it's a done deal, there starting to ask about the weapons. And BTW, I have no sympathy for the Democrats who voted for this war, and are JUST NOW starting to question where the weapons are. They are just as culpable as Bush in all of this.

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    The fact is we are building schools, and hospitals, and all of the other services they need. We have not been BOMBING HOSPITALS for 13 years. It is a documented fact that unless it was palaces and military, Hussein did not give a rats ass about infastructure, and nothing was built. WE did not ruin their hospital and school systems, HE did. We are fixing it.


We've been bombing the country since the end of the Gulf War. That's a fact. We never stopped bombing after the first Gulf War. Just as ThreepMe said, it's the LEAST we can do as this point.

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    And I never blindly support the president. Have a conversation with me about his policy towards illegal immigrants (from Mexico in-particular, and his out-of-control (almost liberal!) spending of late, and you will get a very different story.


"Liberal-like" spending? It sure as hell ain't going to social services, education, or to other programs that need it. But I know where that 87 billion is going.

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    The fact is that Politics BS aside, the larger picture is that this Iraq War was a good thing in the end. The likes of people like you who blindly OPPOSE the president are incapable of seeing that.


People like me? You mean, professionals with graduate desgrees who are actively involved in their community? Yeah, I'm the fucking problem.

The man said things that were blatently false. He said he knew, it's his job to know - especially when going to war - and he didn't know or lied about it. It's that simple.

If that's "blindly OPPOSING" the president, then I'm Stevie fucking Wonder. But it's not blindly opposing - it's holding him accountable for getting us into something that he had no business getting us into. The ends does not justify the means - not if this is a democracy.
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst
Level: 68

Posts: 740/1136
EXP: 2606004
For next: 122810

Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3711 days
Last activity: 3181 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on 3.10.03 1906.25
Reposted on: 3.10.10 1907.11
Looking at the quotes you posted, Grimis, it only looks like they were fairly far along in their development of a delivery system, which is (of course) the easiest part. I'm seeing a great deal about guidance and control systems, propellant, so forth... but the only thing I see about the actual payload (IE, the "weapon of mass destruction" part) was that Saddam wanted to restart his chemical weapons programs once restrictions were lifted (which sounds like compliance to me) and that there might be secret research going on.

A smoking gun it ain't. Hell, that's not even a shell casing.
Michrome
Head cheese
Level: 39

Posts: 239/330
EXP: 391925
For next: 12850

Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3795 days
Last activity: 2862 days
#12 Posted on 4.10.03 0237.34
Reposted on: 4.10.10 0242.10
The delivery system itself is a violation of 1441. If you read through the whole report, there are various parts where he speaks of active concealment methods from the U.N. inspectors, which means he was not complying fully. He was hiding things from the U.N., and had a delivery system ready: Could we have afforded to wait forever? Surely once the U.N. inspections found nothing, he would have gone back to developing weapons again.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2258/4700
EXP: 21494268
For next: 342394

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1232 days
Last activity: 1029 days
#13 Posted on 6.10.03 0602.41
Reposted on: 6.10.10 0604.02
    Originally posted by Nate The Snake
    Looking at the quotes you posted, Grimis, it only looks like they were fairly far along in their development of a delivery system, which is (of course) the easiest part. I'm seeing a great deal about guidance and control systems, propellant, so forth... but the only thing I see about the actual payload (IE, the "weapon of mass destruction" part) was that Saddam wanted to restart his chemical weapons programs once restrictions were lifted

Something that the Iraqis had shown the capability of doing before....ask the Kurds.
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst
Level: 68

Posts: 743/1136
EXP: 2606004
For next: 122810

Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 3711 days
Last activity: 3181 days
AIM:  
#14 Posted on 6.10.03 1928.10
Reposted on: 6.10.10 1928.17
    Originally posted by Grimis
    Something that the Iraqis had shown the capability of doing before....ask the Kurds.


How somebody may or may not use weapons that they may or may not have sometime after hell freezes over (since that's when we'd have actually lifted the restrictions) is, at best, a very weak argument for starting a war.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: Extract From 'Dude, Where's My Country' - 7 Questions For Bush
Next thread: Dubya Wrote A Poem
Previous thread: PDRK: We are building the bomb
(1295 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - The Kay ReportRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.222 seconds.