Hans Blix: Iraq Destroyed WMD 10 Years Ago

[burek]

Link

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix now believes Iraq (news - web sites) destroyed its weapons of mass destruction 10 years ago and that intelligence agencies were wrong in their weapons assessment that led to war.

In an interview with Australian radio from Sweden, Blix said the search for evidence of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons would probably only uncover documents at best.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: burek
Link

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix now believes Iraq (news - web sites) destroyed its weapons of mass destruction 10 years ago and that intelligence agencies were wrong in their weapons assessment that led to war.

In an interview with Australian radio from Sweden, Blix said the search for evidence of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons would probably only uncover documents at best.

How does that change anything. He's had six months to see what's going on, study the outcome, and come to a layman's conclusion. I won't doubt that if Blix comes to the "logical" conclusion that sh!t smells, it'll be newsworthy.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Too bad Bush had to attack before this could be found out. Then again, perhaps he suspected or knew it to be true, and had to attack while the smokescreen of WMDs had some credibility. That would account for the rush to war based on what has turned out to be justified on doubtful evidence.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Too bad Bush had to attack before this could be found out. Then again, perhaps he suspected or knew it to be true, and had to attack while the smokescreen of WMDs had some credibility. That would account for the rush to war based on what has turned out to be justified on doubtful evidence.

Shame we bombed the crap out of them in 98 and kept inspections and sanctions going 10 years to long. If there had only required amount of cooperation along the way, this all could be avoided.

 

[DealMonkey]

Give it up Dari, we're never going to find WMDs in Iraq. It was all a charade. But I suppose if you insist, feel free to cling to your dream of finding that elusive barrel of chemical weapons hiding under a camel's ass.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Too bad Bush had to attack before this could be found out. Then again, perhaps he suspected or knew it to be true, and had to attack while the smokescreen of WMDs had some credibility. That would account for the rush to war based on what has turned out to be justified on doubtful evidence.

Shame we bombed the crap out of them in 98 and kept inspections and sanctions going 10 years to long. If there had only required amount of cooperation along the way, this all could be avoided.

Too bad we didnt get inspections in that time. We did not go to war because of inspections though. Blix was getting to look around. Inspections were occuring, and could have continued for as long as desired. There were options short of war for those with imagination to implement. Saddam wasnt going anywhere, and Iraq had shown no signs of attacking it's neighbors. He was contained.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Too bad Bush had to attack before this could be found out. Then again, perhaps he suspected or knew it to be true, and had to attack while the smokescreen of WMDs had some credibility. That would account for the rush to war based on what has turned out to be justified on doubtful evidence.

Shame we bombed the crap out of them in 98 and kept inspections and sanctions going 10 years to long. If there had only required amount of cooperation along the way, this all could be avoided.

Too bad we didnt get inspections in that time. We did not go to war because of inspections though. Blix was getting to look around. Inspections were occuring, and could have continued for as long as desired. There were options short of war for those with imagination to implement. Saddam wasnt going anywhere, and Iraq had shown no signs of attacking it's neighbors. He was contained.

Yes as long as we 4 carriers and 150k troops stationed at his back door. And even this did not get full cooperation.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Too bad Bush had to attack before this could be found out. Then again, perhaps he suspected or knew it to be true, and had to attack while the smokescreen of WMDs had some credibility. That would account for the rush to war based on what has turned out to be justified on doubtful evidence.

Shame we bombed the crap out of them in 98 and kept inspections and sanctions going 10 years to long. If there had only required amount of cooperation along the way, this all could be avoided.

Too bad we didnt get inspections in that time. We did not go to war because of inspections though. Blix was getting to look around. Inspections were occuring, and could have continued for as long as desired. There were options short of war for those with imagination to implement. Saddam wasnt going anywhere, and Iraq had shown no signs of attacking it's neighbors. He was contained.

Yes as long as we 4 carriers and 150k troops stationed at his back door. And even this did not get full cooperation.

We got enough cooperation. Guess what? We still have a lot of troops there now. Of course there is a little matter of a war and an occupation now. Saddam could have had his fangs pulled right enough. Saddams position could have been made untenable. The whole country could have been made a no-fly zone for example. Troop movements restricted. It could have been tried. It was not. So suppose those troops were there for a few years? Well, how long do you think they will be there now? Again, there were things (some of which I went into before the shooting started) that could have been tried. They werent.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Too bad Bush had to attack before this could be found out. Then again, perhaps he suspected or knew it to be true, and had to attack while the smokescreen of WMDs had some credibility. That would account for the rush to war based on what has turned out to be justified on doubtful evidence.

Shame we bombed the crap out of them in 98 and kept inspections and sanctions going 10 years to long. If there had only required amount of cooperation along the way, this all could be avoided.

Too bad we didnt get inspections in that time. We did not go to war because of inspections though. Blix was getting to look around. Inspections were occuring, and could have continued for as long as desired. There were options short of war for those with imagination to implement. Saddam wasnt going anywhere, and Iraq had shown no signs of attacking it's neighbors. He was contained.

Yes as long as we 4 carriers and 150k troops stationed at his back door. And even this did not get full cooperation.

We got enough cooperation. Guess what? We still have a lot of troops there now. Of course there is a little matter of a war and an occupation now. Saddam could have had his fangs pulled right enough. Saddams position could have been made untenable. The whole country could have been made a no-fly zone for example. Troop movements restricted. It could have been tried. It was not. So suppose those troops were there for a few years? Well, how long do you think they will be there now? Again, there were things (some of which I went into before the shooting started) that could have been tried. They werent.

I dont disagree. The UN failed to put a timeline on the inspections. Every resolution that had a timeline in it, was going to be veto'd by France. 1441 should have had 120-180day timeline for complete cooperation, anything less complete would mean withdrawing the 1991 ceasefire.

INspections should have been administred by a large number(thousands) of armed inspectors and an organization that is not afraid to use force if needed.

 

[LunarRay]

Given we've just about prooved that SH DID comply with UN resolutions regarding the WMD shouldn't we reinstall him as president and rebuild the bombed sites and palaces and return all his loot and unearth Uzi and Snoozi and return the power to SH's crew. He was innocent of material non compliance and all?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Given we've just about prooved that SH DID comply with UN resolutions regarding the WMD shouldn't we reinstall him as president and rebuild the bombed sites and palaces and return all his loot and unearth Uzi and Snoozi and return the power to SH's crew. He was innocent of material non compliance and all?

I am sure the UN is waiting to do that.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Given we've just about prooved that SH DID comply with UN resolutions regarding the WMD shouldn't we reinstall him as president and rebuild the bombed sites and palaces and return all his loot and unearth Uzi and Snoozi and return the power to SH's crew. He was innocent of material non compliance and all?

I am sure the UN is waiting to do that.

I've been waiting for someone to proffer that argument here.. but, alas.. so I just had to say it myself.. sorta like having the government sieze your assets and then be forced to return them after you be found not guilty. Ok a stretch.. but, the logic is somewhat consistent and remember 1441 included a statement that the sovereignty of Iraq and neighbors was recognized.. and we agreed to that.

 

[glenn1]

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix now believes Iraq (news - web sites) destroyed its weapons of mass destruction 10 years ago and that intelligence agencies were wrong in their weapons assessment that led to war.

Good of you to bring this up six months after the fact, Sherlock Hans. You're truly putting on a clinic about how a bureaucrat ensures he's correct... just delay giving an opinion for so long that your (non-) advice is worthless because the sun will have exploded first, then wait until after the decision is made to bash the decision maker about whether the decision was a correct one or not.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: glenn1

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Former U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix now believes Iraq (news - web sites) destroyed its weapons of mass destruction 10 years ago and that intelligence agencies were wrong in their weapons assessment that led to war.

Good of you to bring this up six months after the fact, Sherlock Hans. You're truly putting on a clinic about how a bureaucrat ensures he's correct... just delay giving an opinion for so long that your (non-) advice is worthless because the sun will have exploded first, then wait until after the decision is made to bash the decision maker about whether the decision was a correct one or not.

Any advice/knowlege/opinion that Blix was always useless even if it was correct. The war was going to happen regardless, and if you recall Blix did not find anything warranting a war and said as much. Perhaps he was trying to talk about this all along, but was unheard because of all the cries for war? Could be.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Too bad Bush had to attack before this could be found out. Then again, perhaps he suspected or knew it to be true, and had to attack while the smokescreen of WMDs had some credibility. That would account for the rush to war based on what has turned out to be justified on doubtful evidence.

Shame we bombed the crap out of them in 98 and kept inspections and sanctions going 10 years to long. If there had only required amount of cooperation along the way, this all could be avoided.

Too bad we didnt get inspections in that time. We did not go to war because of inspections though. Blix was getting to look around. Inspections were occuring, and could have continued for as long as desired. There were options short of war for those with imagination to implement. Saddam wasnt going anywhere, and Iraq had shown no signs of attacking it's neighbors. He was contained.

Yes as long as we 4 carriers and 150k troops stationed at his back door. And even this did not get full cooperation.

We got enough cooperation. Guess what? We still have a lot of troops there now. Of course there is a little matter of a war and an occupation now. Saddam could have had his fangs pulled right enough. Saddams position could have been made untenable. The whole country could have been made a no-fly zone for example. Troop movements restricted. It could have been tried. It was not. So suppose those troops were there for a few years? Well, how long do you think they will be there now? Again, there were things (some of which I went into before the shooting started) that could have been tried. They werent.

I dont disagree. The UN failed to put a timeline on the inspections. Every resolution that had a timeline in it, was going to be veto'd by France. 1441 should have had 120-180day timeline for complete cooperation, anything less complete would mean withdrawing the 1991 ceasefire.

INspections should have been administred by a large number(thousands) of armed inspectors and an organization that is not afraid to use force if needed.

Wasn't France asking that the doomed resolution simply have another 30 days (or so) for the deadline, instead of an immediate (day or two) one that the US wanted?

 

[tcsenter]

Shame we bombed the crap out of them in 98 and kept inspections and sanctions going 10 years to long. If there had only required amount of cooperation along the way, this all could be avoided.

Not really. Since Blix is only now disclosing this apparent "bomb shell" that is news to the entire international community, the intelligence agencies of the US, Britain, Russia, Germany, France, and the Netherlands all being unanimous right up until the day the war started in their belief that the probability of Iraq possessing at least some weapons of mass destruction was high. Note I say probability, because that's what intelligence is all about. Certainty is a rare exception in interpreting intelligence, its mostly inferences and presumptions based on probabilities - not certainties - and Blix was not even convinced Iraq had been 100% disarmed of its WMD until...well...now apparently.

But let us assume that it had been determined back in 1998 that Iraq was 'fully' disarmed. What now? Lift the sanctions on Iraq, restoring Hussein's ability to pursue all the nefarious activities for which he has proven over and over to have an insatiable appetite and has never demonstrated any intent of giving up? That wouldn't have been an option; not then, not now.

The realities are clear and were articulated quite well by the Clinton Administration as well as most Democrats on the Hill before Bush took office: Saddam had to go before the sanctions could be lifted. Because the United Nations can't make the tough decisions doesn't mean its resulting incompetence is correct or wise.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Maybe Blix should talk to Scott Ritter and get their stories straight.

 

[Red Dawn]

Saddam had to go before the sanctions could be lifted. Because the United Nations can't make the tough decisions doesn't mean its resulting incompetence is correct or wise.

Yeah but if Bush tried to sell the American People that for as reason to go to war without the WMD wildcard he would have failed.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Great, now he tells us....look what we have done. Let's get Saddam back in power so he can clean up Iraq once and for all.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Great, now he tells us....look what we have done. Let's get Saddam back in power so he can clean up Iraq once and for all.

I knew it, you and sillyTIM are one in the same (or twin Brothers seperated at birth) LOL!

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

That's no way to welcome a new team player, Red. I've decided to post contrarian views today...contrary to logic, which is the norm around here. I have decided to take up the good fight with my liberal friends for a change. Bush is evil.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
That's no way to welcome a new team player, Red. I've decided to post contrarian views today...contrary to logic, which is the norm around here. I have decided to take up the good fight with my liberal friends for a change. Bush is evil.

So you're giving 99.99% of your brain the day off?

 

[phillyTIM]

We've de-brainwashed John, from the brainwash you neocons & apologists gave him, UQ. *EG*

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
That's no way to welcome a new team player, Red. I've decided to post contrarian views today...contrary to logic, which is the norm around here. I have decided to take up the good fight with my liberal friends for a change. Bush is evil.

[Reagan Voice] Well there you go again[/Reagan] I always knew you were a switch hitter!🙂

 

[phillyTIM]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I always knew you were a switch hitter!🙂

Some of the BEST men are!! 😉 😉