Another interesting article:
Playing lost and found in Iraq
Dan Bagley
Cavalier Daily Associate Editor
THERE has been a lot of talk recently about what has not been found in the newly liberated Iraq. Unfortunately, some people are entirely too quick to criticize the president and the actions of this nation and look past what has been found in Iraq.
While no vast stockpiles have been found, a commission headed by former weapons inspector David Kay has found a wide range of evidence of weapons of mass destruction programs.
In a preliminary report from October of 2003, Kay states that his investigation has found "a clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research," (Interim report of Iraqi Survey Group). He continues that specific agents used in the construction of biological and chemical weapons have been found within Iraq. (bold emphasis added)
It is, after all, an election year, and the opponents of the president have been attempting to blast him on this issue as much as possible. Unfortunately, these people have the ability to pick and choose their battles. For example, they specifically chose to ignore David Kay's statement that "what we learned during the inspection made Iraq a more dangerous place potentially than in fact we thought it was even before the war." Coming from the same source that many Democrats cite to criticize the president, this claim should carry significant weight.
Clearly, an intelligence failure has occurred. Statements from the administration, from the domestic intelligence agencies and even foreign governments firmly believed that Iraq possessed large amounts of weapons of mass destruction. What Bush's opponents overlook is that these claims were not only being made by proponents of the war. By the time combat operations began, even the respective intelligence agencies of Germany and France firmly believed that WMD existed within Iraq.
To date, no one has provided any evidence that shows in any capacity that the president or his administration has misled the American people. The old saying goes garbage in, garbage out, and if the intelligence community is forced to analyze an incomplete picture, it is possible that they will make incorrect judgments. The Democrats cannot hold this administration responsible for the intelligence failures for agencies that they have repeatedly cut funding for. Not once has a member of the intelligence community stated that they were pressured by a person in authority above them to make exaggerated claims about Iraq's WMD capabilities. The claims that were made were widely considered to be the truth.
Iraq is roughly the size of California, and a significant stockpile of WMD could be located in something as small as two-car garage. Needless to say, the search for such weapons is not over. The results thus far have been disheartening, but the lack of large stockpiles does not discredit the United States' action to rid this region of a petty, tyrannical, evil dictator.
Clearly, the world is a safer place with the removal of this dictator. Few people are in a position to refute this, and indeed, most of the criticism about this war stems from the lack of WMD caches found. Is it truly necessary for us to find these caches to prove an imminent threat to the United States?
More important than proving an imminent threat, we approach the question: Can we afford to wait for an imminent threat in this day and age? For a threat to be truly imminent, it must be presented to us directly and clearly. In this age of rogue nations, terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, we cannot allow ourselves to wait until we no longer have a shadow of a doubt. The removal of Saddam clearly has improved the safety of this county and the entire world.
The only argument that remains for those who would criticize our president for their own political gain during this election year is the completely false accusation that the president has somehow misled the public regarding this matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. I would challenge these people to find an instance where someone has gone on the record and stated that they were indeed pressured into making a certain conclusion. Experts have pointed out that many of the conclusions on which the war was justified were formed during the Clinton administration. This cannot be construed as an example of creation of false intelligence to rationalize a war. Very credible claims of weapons of mass destruction did not suddenly appear the second Bush took office.
The intelligence failure is regrettable indeed, but the fault is placed firmly on the shoulders of the agencies that made those analyses. No one has misled the public, except for Saddam Hussein himself who has to date been found to have been in breach of U.N. resolutions in hundreds, if not thousands, of cases.
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVArtic...18721&pid=1115