Why the U.S. knows IRAQ is lying---article by Condoleezza Rice

milagro

Golden Member
Jun 19, 2001
1,459
0
0
I've seen various "IRAQ" posts here and just thought i'd throw this article into the mix. I've cut and paste it from the New York Times here

Why We Know Iraq Is Lying
By CONDOLEEZZA RICE


ASHINGTON
Eleven weeks after the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution demanding ? yet again ? that Iraq disclose and disarm all its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, it is appropriate to ask, "Has Saddam Hussein finally decided to voluntarily disarm?" Unfortunately, the answer is a clear and resounding no.

There is no mystery to voluntary disarmament. Countries that decide to disarm lead inspectors to weapons and production sites, answer questions before they are asked, state publicly and often the intention to disarm and urge their citizens to cooperate. The world knows from examples set by South Africa, Ukraine and Kazakhstan what it looks like when a government decides that it will cooperatively give up its weapons of mass destruction. The critical common elements of these efforts include a high-level political commitment to disarm, national initiatives to dismantle weapons programs, and full cooperation and transparency.

In 1989 South Africa made the strategic decision to dismantle its covert nuclear weapons program. It destroyed its arsenal of seven weapons and later submitted to rigorous verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Inspectors were given complete access to all nuclear facilities (operating and defunct) and the people who worked there. They were also presented with thousands of documents detailing, for example, the daily operation of uranium enrichment facilities as well as the construction and dismantling of specific weapons.

Ukraine and Kazakhstan demonstrated a similar pattern of cooperation when they decided to rid themselves of the nuclear weapons, intercontinental ballistic missiles and heavy bombers inherited from the Soviet Union. With significant assistance from the United States ? warmly accepted by both countries ? disarmament was orderly, open and fast. Nuclear warheads were returned to Russia. Missile silos and heavy bombers were destroyed or dismantled ? once in a ceremony attended by the American and Russian defense chiefs. In one instance, Kazakhstan revealed the existence of a ton of highly enriched uranium and asked the United States to remove it, lest it fall into the wrong hands.

Iraq's behavior could not offer a starker contrast. Instead of a commitment to disarm, Iraq has a high-level political commitment to maintain and conceal its weapons, led by Saddam Hussein and his son Qusay, who controls the Special Security Organization, which runs Iraq's concealment activities. Instead of implementing national initiatives to disarm, Iraq maintains institutions whose sole purpose is to thwart the work of the inspectors. And instead of full cooperation and transparency, Iraq has filed a false declaration to the United Nations that amounts to a 12,200-page lie.

For example, the declaration fails to account for or explain Iraq's efforts to get uranium from abroad, its manufacture of specific fuel for ballistic missiles it claims not to have, and the gaps previously identified by the United Nations in Iraq's accounting for more than two tons of the raw materials needed to produce thousands of gallons of anthrax and other biological weapons.

Iraq's declaration even resorted to unabashed plagiarism, with lengthy passages of United Nations reports copied word-for-word (or edited to remove any criticism of Iraq) and presented as original text. Far from informing, the declaration is intended to cloud and confuse the true picture of Iraq's arsenal. It is a reflection of the regime's well-earned reputation for dishonesty and constitutes a material breach of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, which set up the current inspections program.

Unlike other nations that have voluntarily disarmed ? and in defiance of Resolution 1441 ? Iraq is not allowing inspectors "immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted access" to facilities and people involved in its weapons program. As a recent inspection at the home of an Iraqi nuclear scientist demonstrated, and other sources confirm, material and documents are still being moved around in farcical shell games. The regime has blocked free and unrestricted use of aerial reconnaissance.

The list of people involved with weapons of mass destruction programs, which the United Nations required Iraq to provide, ends with those who worked in 1991 ? even though the United Nations had previously established that the programs continued after that date. Interviews with scientists and weapons officials identified by inspectors have taken place only in the watchful presence of the regime's agents. Given the duplicitous record of the regime, its recent promises to do better can only be seen as an attempt to stall for time.

Last week's finding by inspectors of 12 chemical warheads not included in Iraq's declaration was particularly troubling. In the past, Iraq has filled this type of warhead with sarin ? a deadly nerve agent used by Japanese terrorists in 1995 to kill 12 Tokyo subway passengers and sicken thousands of others. Richard Butler, the former chief United Nations arms inspector, estimates that if a larger type of warhead that Iraq has made and used in the past were filled with VX (an even deadlier nerve agent) and launched at a major city, it could kill up to one million people. Iraq has also failed to provide United Nations inspectors with documentation of its claim to have destroyed its VX stockpiles.

Many questions remain about Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and arsenal ? and it is Iraq's obligation to provide answers. It is failing in spectacular fashion. By both its actions and its inactions, Iraq is proving not that it is a nation bent on disarmament, but that it is a nation with something to hide. Iraq is still treating inspections as a game. It should know that time is running out.


Condoleezza Rice is the national security adviser.
 

SlowSS

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2002
1,573
1
0
Originally posted by: milagro
I've seen various "IRAQ" posts here and just thought i'd throw this article into the mix. I've cut and paste it from the New York Times here

Why We Know Iraq Is Lying
By CONDOLEEZZA RICE


For example, the declaration fails to account for or explain Iraq's efforts to get uranium from abroad, its manufacture of specific fuel for ballistic missiles it claims not to have, and the gaps previously identified by the United Nations in Iraq's accounting for more than two tons of the raw materials needed to produce thousands of gallons of anthrax and other biological weapons.

I still think it is just a matter of time before we get a full picture of Iraq's attempts to acquire uranium, and discovery of Weapons of Mass Detruction.

Link
Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction Program
Posted on Sun, Dec. 01, 2002 story:pUB_DESC
Connection to Ukraine eyed in Iraq deal probe
By Joby Warrick
WASHINGTON POST

KHARKIV, Ukraine - From the start of Iraq's quest for a nuclear bomb in the 1970s until the present, the main obstacle has been the lack of fissile material -- enriched uranium or plutonium needed for a nuclear explosion.

Western intelligence agencies estimate that if President Saddam Hussein could buy or steal a quantity of fissile material one-third the size of the 165-pound uranium cache Ukraine's Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology (KIPT) has, Iraq could become a nuclear power in less than a year.

The possibility that Iraq might try to cut a deal for the uranium partly explains the intense U.S. interest in recent Iraqi trade missions to this city.

Encouraged by Kharkiv businessmen, Iraq opened a consular office here in December 2000 and dispatched at least three official delegations since 1998 to explore trade opportunities.

At least one of the delegations toured the institute, laboratory officials confirmed.

"The Iraqis were interested only in an overview -- they made no requests," said Alexei Yegorev, the institute deputy director.

Yegorev said there were no other official contacts with the Iraqis, although individual scientists recalled being approached by Middle Eastern businessmen who claimed to represent Iraq or Iran.

Concerns about possible Iraqi overtures to the institute first arose in the early 1990s, when documents obtained by U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq pointed to alleged trafficking of weapons materials between Kharkiv and Baghdad.

The key Ukrainian figure in the documents was Yuri Orshansky, a businessman with a Ph.D in electrical engineering.

At the time, Orshansky was the head of a loose confederation of Ukrainian businesses called Montelekt that included several of the KIPT's sister institutions in Kharkiv.

Documents found in Iraq included an agreement signed by Orshansky and Iraqi Brig. Gen. Naim Bakr Ali, then one of the leaders of Iraq's ballistic missile program, to provide Iraq with guidance systems and parts for advanced missiles, according to Timothy McCarthy, a former U.N. weapons inspector who investigated Iraq's Ukrainian connections in the mid-1990s.

A third party to the protocol was a Kharkiv company, Khartron, a neighbor of the KIPT and an institution best known for designing Soviet ballistic missiles.

"We found a copy of Orshansky's passport in Baghdad with the documents describing the deal," said McCarthy, now the director of the Proliferation Research and Assessment Program at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies. "The Iraqis basically gave him up."

McCarthy said U.N. inspectors never were able to determine whether missile parts actually were delivered -- nor could the inspectors directly link Orshansky to any other technology sales to Iraq.

The chances of finding hard evidence linking any foreign supplier to Iraq are always small, he noted, because Iraqi officials often use middlemen and obscure delivery routes to mask smuggling.

Meanwhile, Orshansky's continuing efforts to build ties between Iraq and Kharkiv businesses earned him two years ago the special title of "honorary consul" of Iraq in Kharkiv.

In an interview last year with the Ukrainian defense news service, Defense Express, Orshansky boasted of making 40 trips to Baghdad since 1993, and said he had embarked on a "constant study of Iraq's needs in all areas," working within the boundaries of Ukraine's export laws.

"On some issues we have begun to work with Iraq in order to create conditions so that orders are placed with Ukraine," Orshansky was quoted as saying. "Even if they want to create a nuclear bomb, we will study this."

In the months following U.S. allegations of illegal sales of Ukrainian air defense radars to Iraq, Orshansky has kept a lower profile.

Contacted at his Kharkiv office last month, he declined to meet with a Washington Post reporter or discuss any aspect of his business ties with Iraq.
 

Damage

Senior member
Dec 3, 2001
491
0
0
Stop worrying about the DAMN nukes!.. The Japaneese in WWII gave up on it because biologics were easier and cheaper.. (Look up unit 731).. China still has pluage outbreaks because of of.. Sheezz!

VX gas.... A little goes a long way and it's not a "technical" device.. They can hand a canister to any homoside bommer type and even if he can't spell "nuck'lar" it kills THOUSANDS...
 

Bignate603

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
13,897
1
0
Nuclear weapons have a scare factor that even biological and chemical weapons don't match. It's been ingrained into our culture since the cold war that nuclear weapons are the end all and be all. They are the apocolypse.
 

Babbles

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2001
8,253
14
81
I think the need to create nuclear weapons is more of making a point then actually using them. Sure bio and chem weapons are easier, cheaper, and possibly more deadly.

However, there is a certain aire when a country has a 'nuke' and can launch them. I think more people are afraid of nuclear weapons then biological/chemical ones and fear is what he is after.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,374
8,499
126
somehow i think that if there were a debate condoleezza rice would pwn many members of this forum
 

Hammer

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
13,217
1
81
the nukes are being developed mostly for political clout. iraq suddenly announcing it possesses nuclear weapons would change the rules of the game. chemical weapons are my main concern.
 

Babbles

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2001
8,253
14
81
I am more afraid of the biological weapons. Chemical weapons may make somebody suffer for a lifetime, but hopefully it would be limited only to those individuals exposed.

Biological weapons, on the other hand, can be passed from one person to another.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Stark
I wonder what harry belafonte thinks of condoleezza... aunt chloe?

That is what liberals think about any smart talented conservative minoritys.
 

rchiu

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2002
3,846
0
0
Unlike other nations that have voluntarily disarmed ?and in defiance of Resolution 1441 ?Iraq is not allowing inspectors "immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted access" to facilities and people involved in its weapons program. As a recent inspection at the home of an Iraqi nuclear scientist demonstrated, and other sources confirm, material and documents are still being moved around in farcical shell games. The regime has blocked free and unrestricted use of aerial reconnaissance.

The whole article sounded like she is the weapon inspector and decides on her own that Iraq has what she and Bush call Weapon of Mass Destruction, when the real weapon inspectors are asking for more time to determine if Iraq has those weapons.

If she and Bush have the evidence, stop yapping and show it to the world. If not, let the weapon inspectors do the job and UN decide if Iraq violates the Resolution. War kills both Iraqi and American, and it should not be started just because of suspicion and guesses.

Oh yeah, the whole thing started with 20 hijackers with box cutters, why is the focus now on Iraq and Weapon of Mass Destruction? Maybe the politicians are trying to put fears in people and get their agendas going??
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: rchiu
Unlike other nations that have voluntarily disarmed ?and in defiance of Resolution 1441 ?Iraq is not allowing inspectors "immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted access" to facilities and people involved in its weapons program. As a recent inspection at the home of an Iraqi nuclear scientist demonstrated, and other sources confirm, material and documents are still being moved around in farcical shell games. The regime has blocked free and unrestricted use of aerial reconnaissance.

The whole article sounded like she is the weapon inspector and decides on her own that Iraq has what she and Bush call Weapon of Mass Destruction, when the real weapon inspectors are asking for more time to determine if Iraq has those weapons.

If she and Bush have the evidence, stop yapping and show it to the world. If not, let the weapon inspectors do the job and UN decide if Iraq violates the Resolution. War kills both Iraqi and American, and it should not be started just because of suspicion and guesses.

Oh yeah, the whole thing started with 20 hijackers with box cutters, why is the focus now on Iraq and Weapon of Mass Destruction? Maybe the politicians are trying to put fears in people and get their agendas going??

One, this whole thing did NOT start with 20 box cutters or have anything to do with 9/11. That's a completely wrong assesment on your part. It started with the Gulf War when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Are you old enough to remember that?

Two, Dr. Condoleezza Rice is the National Security Advisor. She has more information on Iraq than almost anyone else even including the weapons inspectors. The information is not suspicion and guesses. Iraq had weapons in 1998. They have not disclosed what happened to those weapons in the report they submitted.

But, if you don't like the US view, read the British view on what toys Saddam is hiding.
THE ASSESSMENT OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,960
278
126
Its not the nukes that are a threat from Iraq. HINT: Its the littlest things, actually.
 

Yossarian

Lifer
Dec 26, 2000
18,010
1
81
Originally posted by: etech
One, this whole thing did NOT start with 20 box cutters or have anything to do with 9/11. That's a completely wrong assesment on your part. It started with the Gulf War when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Are you old enough to remember that?

Two, Dr. Condoleezza Rice is the National Security Advisor. She has more information on Iraq than almost anyone else even including the weapons inspectors. The information is not suspicion and guesses. Iraq had weapons in 1998. They have not disclosed what happened to those weapons in the report they submitted.[/L]

If you think we would be in Iraq now if 9/11 had never happened you are fooling yourself. The U.S. just decided now, over 10 years later, to get on the ball? I don't think so.

That said, Ms. Rice is awesome.

<--mostly liberal
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,111
926
126
What she said, certainly supports what we are going to do. Now, lets get the ball rolling. The sooner we execute, the sooner our economy can recover.
 

LethalWolfe

Diamond Member
Apr 14, 2001
3,679
0
0
Originally posted by: PipBoy
Originally posted by: etech
One, this whole thing did NOT start with 20 box cutters or have anything to do with 9/11. That's a completely wrong assesment on your part. It started with the Gulf War when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Are you old enough to remember that?

Two, Dr. Condoleezza Rice is the National Security Advisor. She has more information on Iraq than almost anyone else even including the weapons inspectors. The information is not suspicion and guesses. Iraq had weapons in 1998. They have not disclosed what happened to those weapons in the report they submitted.[/L]

If you think we would be in Iraq now if 9/11 had never happened you are fooling yourself. The U.S. just decided now, over 10 years later, to get on the ball? I don't think so.

That said, Ms. Rice is awesome.

<--mostly liberal

Who was in the White House for most of those 10years? ;)


Lethal