US weapons team quits Iraq

[schmooky007]

Originally posted by theknife
think you better fall back to the "save the poor Iraqi people" line...you might get better mileage out of that one

if we're talking about saving the iraqi people then by all means this war was justified. the problem is that's not what the american people were told they were going to war for.

i truly believe that iraq did have an active WMD program. maybe not a fullscale nuclear development yet but certainly a chemical and biological program. giving the amount of information that's been coming out it appears more and more that many of these banned weapons were transferred somewhere else shortly before the war, possibly syria, under the nose of american intelligence. while i believe the americans had good intentions, the intelligence fuckup is quite embarrassing. if this was some kind of "rescue mission" then the bush administration should have said so from the very beginning. instead, they chose to focus on the WMD issue and now, because of faulty intelligence, the bush administration looks stupid.

[malvachat]

"the bush administration looks stupid." NO you don't mean that.

[theknife]

Originally posted by scooobiedooobie
and what part of kays complete interim progress report (that fully contradicts himself in your quote) didn't you get?

he's changed his story.

even though his revised statements blatantly contradict his previous statements you believe his revised statements...and why? 'cause it's what you want to believe.

if only you could take the words "i don't think..." out of kays latest statements. but as is, it's just a collection of conjecturous statements from a failed "expert" who couldn't find a the broad side of the great wall of china if he was standing right in front of it.

let's see...he was an expert during the interim report ("interim" as in "here's what we know so far), but in his final assessment (as in "here's what we know now"), he's a failed expert? very weak, fellas - i'm disappointed in you

"here's what we know now" supercedes "interim" - it's a chronological concept you clearly have difficulty grasping.

From today's NYT:

Asked directly if he was saying that Iraq did not have any large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the country, Dr. Kay replied, according to a transcript of the taped interview made public by Reuters, "That is correct."

http://www.nytimes.com/

let it go, fellas...go for a walk, have a cream soda, go wash your car, anything, but just let it go...

[scooobiedooobie]

Asked directly if he was saying that Iraq did not have any large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the country, Dr. Kay replied, according to a transcript of the taped interview made public by Reuters, "That is correct."

lol...seems like a response from a magic eight ball.


just 'cause kay doesn't "think" that the wmds are in iraq, does not mean that they do not exist.


other questions posed to kay in that same interview......


Q: Why did you decide to step down?

A: "It was, as usually it is in these cases, a complex set of issues, it related in part to a reduction in the resource and a change in focus of ISG (Iraq Survey Group). When I had started out, I had made it a condition that ISG be exclusively focused on WMD. That's no longer so. The reduction of resources. And the reason those were important is, and at least to me they were important, is I didn't feel that we could complete the task as quickly as I thought it important to complete the task, unless we exclusively focused ISG.

Q: Is it true that one of the reasons you wanted to step down was because you don't believe that anything will be found, is that true?

A: "No. No, that wasn't the reason. In fact, the reason I thought it important to complete everything is that ... by the time we get to June ... we're not going to find much after June. Once the Iraqis take complete control of the government it is just almost impossible to operate in the way that we operate. In fact it was already becoming tough. We had an important ministry that would not allow its people to be interviewed unless they had someone present. It was like the old regime.


the rest of the interview is mostly peppered with kays "i think"...and "i don't think"....

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackage...section =news

[scooobiedooobie]

Originally posted by schmooky007
giving the amount of information that's been coming out it appears more and more that many of these banned weapons were transferred somewhere else shortly before the war, possibly syria.....

that's exactly where david kay says they are.



Saddam's WMD Hidden In Syria, Says Iraq Survey Chief

By Con Coughlin
(Filed: 25/01/2004)

David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, Dr Kay, who last week resigned as head of the Iraq Survey Group, said that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam.

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

Dr Kay's comments will intensify pressure on President Bashar Assad to clarify the extent of his co-operation with Saddam's regime and details of Syria's WMD programme. Mr Assad has said that Syria was entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own biological and chemical weapons arsenal.

Syria was one of Iraq's main allies in the run-up to the war and hundreds of Iraqi officials - including members of Saddam's family - were given refuge in Damascus after the collapse of the Iraqi dictator's regime. Many of the foreign fighters responsible for conducting terrorist attacks against the coalition are believed to have entered Iraq through Syria.

A Syrian official last night said: "These allegations have been raised many times in the past by Israeli officials, which proves that they are false."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html

[CORRUPTERBUSTER]

Before the war broke out the Iraqis had told the United States that they did not have these weapons, I think they were telling the truth and moved all their weapons over several boarders it is the only thing that makes any since out of this whole thing.

Everyone thinks that this war would start on one day and end the next and all our troops will come home and we will let the Iraqis have their country back in their hands and wipe our hands of it. That isn’t the way the war works, at least not in this day and age. We know where the weapons are and we have known that before the war broke out, and like I told my father the night they dropped those bombs on Baghdad, “They just wasted those bombs Saddom was long gone at that time. You could tell that just by the way he looked when we captured him. I also think that his sons are really still alive; any makeup artist can do wonders with faces. Us Americans are on a need to know kind of deal, so our government only tells us what we need to hear.

Do I feel that the war in Iraq was necessary? In some ways yes and no. I knew that we had to over throw Saddom that was just in my eyes. He was just a bad apple spoiled and corrupt. Over all I do think that the war did what it set out to do and did it very well and our troops did a great job. Why I feel it wasn’t necessary is my feelings for the Iraqis who had to go through all that blood shed.

Do the Iraqis have these weapons of mass destruction? Sure they do, we just haven’t gotten outside of Iraq to know who has them all. We know but we can’t do anything about it but if I was smart I would keep my eyes on Syria and Iran because you never know what those fools will do.

I know I might get hammered for what I said tonight just joining and all. But like I said there is more to the war in Iraq then just the weapons. The weapons are such a small problem compared to what lays ahead for the United States. The wars have just started, but the bigger ones are just around the corner. This is far from over.

[ONEMANBANNED]

yup brave 1st post for a forum that deals with other stuff. WMD`s ha ha don`t get me started . they have way better sand then us

[theknife]

geez, looks like even the White House has given up on this one:

WASHINGTON Jan. 26 — The White House retreated Monday from its once-confident claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and Democrats swiftly sought to turn the about-face into an election-year issue against President Bush.

The administration's switch came after retired chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay said he had concluded, after nine months of searching, that Saddam Hussein did not have stockpiles of forbidden weapons.

Asked about Kay's remarks, White House spokesman Scott McClellan refused to repeat oft-stated assertions that prohibited weapons eventually would be found.

never mind the WMD's - lemme tell you about those poor Iraqi people we had to liberate...

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040126_2094.html

[Wolfie]

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

I guess that answers the question where we are going next....

[scooobiedooobie]

Originally posted by theknife

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040126_2094.html

a very important quote from your link....

"Asked whether Bush owed the nation an explanation for the discrepancies between his warnings and Kay's findings, Kay said, "I actually think the intelligence community owes the president, rather than the president owing the American people."

[schmooky007]

Originally posted by theknife
geez, looks like even the White House has given up on this one:



never mind the WMD's - lemme tell you about those poor Iraqi people we had to liberate...

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040126_2094.html

no doubt. the bush administration really fucked this one up. it's not that there aren't any iraqi WMD. i'm sure the weapons are out there. they're just not in iraq. and even if there is evidence that iraqi WMD were transported to syria, how are the americans going to deal with syria? launch a military invasion? how? there are american troops in afghanistan, iraq, how the heck can america manage another military operation? their military resources are already stretched. besides, unlike the situation with iraq, there are no UN resolutions against syria that threaten the use of force for non-compliance. therefore any military move against syria will been seen by the world as even more illegitimate than the war in iraq. but then again syria does actually pose a threat to american national security. syria provides a lot of support to hizballah who already attacked americans in the past and hizballah also have close ties to al-kaida.

[span]

Originally posted by schmooky007
how are the americans going to deal with syria? launch a military invasion? how? there are american troops in afghanistan, iraq, how the heck can america manage another military operation? their military resources are already stretched.

you seem to be under the mistaken assumption that Syria has an Army worth a damn, i think no more than 40k ground troops along with the adequate air power would crush them in days, the real problem would be even more terrorists as well as getting a coalition, that would be nearly impossible without irrefutable proof of wrongdoing on Syria's part, that said i don't think a major conflict with Syria will happen anytime in the immediate future, beef up the CIA and fund some insurections for a few years and hope for an uprising like we'll soon be having in Iran.

[scooobiedooobie]

Originally posted by theknife
the Bush's top WMD inspector in Iraq says, when it's all said and done, at the end of the day, that they aren't there.

think you better fall back to the "save the poor Iraqi people" line...you might get better mileage out of that one

since you place so much emphasis on what david kay says....


Kay: Bush Was Right to Attack Iraq
Tuesday, Jan. 27, 2004 10:58 a.m. EST

Critics of the Bush administration have seized on Iraq weapons hunter David Kay's pronouncement over the weekend that Baghdad didn't have any WMDs immediately before the U.S. attacked last March.

But Tuesday morning Kay gave President Bush a full-fledged endorsement on his decision to go to war.

In an interview with NBC's "Today Show," Kay told host Matt Lauer that the U.S. decision to attack was "absolutely prudent."

"In fact," said Kay, "I think at the end of the inspection process, we'll paint a picture of Iraq that was far more dangerous than even we thought it was before the war."

Kay described Iraq's government as "a system collapsing."

"It was a country that had the capability in weapons of mass destruction areas, and ... terrorists, like ants to honey, were going after it."

Meanwhile, Saddam Hussein "was putting more money into his nuclear program, he was pushing ahead his long-range missile program as hard as he could," Kay said.

Although Baghdad wasn't successful, Kay said Iraq "had the intent to acquire these weapons," adding that Saddam had "invested huge amounts of money" to do so.

The chief weapons hunter also debunked the notion that the White House pressured U.S. intelligence to exaggerate the Iraq threat.

"The tendency to say, well, it must have been pressure from the White House is absolutely wrong," he told "Today."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...7/114102.shtml

[Wenchie]

Powell (feb 2001) "He (Saddam) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."


Powell (feb 2003) "We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."

[scooobiedooobie]

Case Not Closed: Iraq’s WMD Stockpiles

March 2nd, 2004


In the summer of 2003, I served as Chief of Staff in the Iraqi Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), an organization formerly called the Ministry of Atomic Energy. The Ministry had a small staff of Americans and Iraqis, and was one of several ministries of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Baghdad. One of our key tasks was to transition several thousand Iraqi scientists and engineers from military and state-owned enterprises to private enterprises involved in more peaceful endeavors. Working there, I enjoyed a unique vantage point on the activities of the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG), the inspection agency headed by Dr. David Kay, charged with finding WMD. Dr. Kay’s recent report and his testimony before Congress have helped fuel flames of criticism of the Bush Administration, and of 12 years of prewar intelligence on Iraq.

We at the MOST were a vital link in the WMD reporting chain, and in coordinating interviews by the ISG with the scientists of the ministry. In addition, we had resident scientific and technical expertise, and some of our people also had extensive experience working with intelligence organizations in the conduct of tactical ground and maritime reconnaissance operations. Based on this background, I want to report to my fellow Americans on some of the problems and missed opportunities I observed in the work of the ISG. In doing so, I speak only for myself, not for my colleagues, or for any organ of the CPA, or for any agency of the United States Government.

The ISG’s search for significant stockpiles of WMD has so far come up empty. It may be that there are no large stockpiles, as Dr. Kay has stated. But from my perspective in the MOST, this lack of a positive finding may also be the result of unfocused and uncoordinated ISG search operations. It is entirely possible that the much sought-after WMD stockpiles may be literally right under the feet of coalition forces, and until a properly coordinated search effort is completed, no firm conclusions about their presence or absence can be reached. The case remains open.

In his recent testimony, Dr. Kay pronounced that there are no large stockpiles of WMD. This is a pretty bold assertion considering that actual surveys of sites we were familiar with were haphazard and uncoordinated. Also, according to his own interim report published in October of 2003, the ISG had not even searched 120 of the 130 known ammo storage points, much less any underground sites. In addition to these known sites, “neighborhood” arms caches are discovered all the time in Iraq. It is entirely possible that WMD stockpiles were moved out of Iraq, or that they were dispersed in Baghdad neighborhoods and throughout Iraq. All of this may even have been accomplished while the unfocused search operations were ongoing.

My most fundamental criticism of the ISG is that previous intelligence assessments, however partial or inadequate they may have been, were not used to provide an operational focus to the search efforts.

Before Dr. Kay’s arrival, the ISG, and its predecessor in the search, the 75th Exploitation Team, were supposedly operating off a list of locations to search for WMD. Presumably, this list was developed based upon pre-war intelligence assessments. However, many of the US intelligence analysts who had been working on Iraq’s WMD, and knowledgeable UNSCOM personnel who had conducted United Nations searches for WMD, were not initially present on the ground in Iraq.

When Dr. Kay arrived, he shifted the focus from the list of sites to interrogating scientists; not just certain scientists based upon a focused plan, but any and all scientists, as the developing trail would lead. It was apparent that the ISG was largely conducting a massive collection exercise without an operational search scheme to guide it.

The effort to interrogate scientists was obviously necessary, and promised to be a valuable source of information. But the shotgun approach was inefficient. The ISG was swamped by the amount of potentially corroborating documentation, which should have been used to shape interview priorities and test the validity of the scientists’ stories, as they were told. It was not until the Fall of 2003, however, that the Defense Intelligence Agency finally contracted out for assistance to go through the reams of documentation available to the Coalition.

The scientists who were interrogated provided information which was suspect at times, due to several factors. Outright deception on their part was always a possibility. People who were themselves incriminated, or who knew of incriminating data, had a very real fear of long-term detention and sequestering by the ISG, not to mention ultimate trial as war criminals. One supposedly cooperative scientist was held incommunicado for weeks, without even telephonic contact with his family. This sort of treatment hardly provides an incentive for others to spill their beans.

Fear of reprisal from Baathist Party “dead-enders” and enforcers was another very powerful inducement to lying and covering up important information. Lacking corroborating documents to trap liars, scientist interrogation became another collection effort with no strategy for identifying and checking on the veracity of key personnel.

In addition, there was apparently little operational control of the search activities which did take place. For example, a report came into the Ministry about a potential biological warfare (BW) equipment cache in the house of a scientist, only blocks away from the palace HQ of the CPA. The ISG operative came to the Ministry and was briefed on the specifics, points of contact, and so forth. The man then went and met with the scientist. Eventually, he gained access to the house. His initial reports back to us were enthusiastic about the equipment and substances he found. For about a week, we heard nothing further, until we received an email from the ISG, stating that he had gone on two weeks leave. Could we please let no one into the house while he was gone?

This sort of ball-dropping, unfortunately, was standard operating procedure for the ISG. There was little or no operational coordination with Combined Joint Task Force-7 (CJTF-7) , which is the headquarters of the Coalition military forces in Iraq, or the tactical units responsible for the area of operations that could have actually secured suspected WMD sites.

Dr. Kay has concluded that Iraq’s key scientists had ended up working directly for Saddam in development of WMD programs, and that they had fooled him into believing in non-existent weapons. My experience, and the character of day to day life in Iraq, indicate just the opposite. We at the MOST have been trying to put 8000 scientists and engineers back to work without their Baathist enforcers and “project managers.” It has been a Herculean task. While the scientific knowledge of the individuals is intact, actually managing complex programs is well beyond the reach of these people.

To assert that the scientists bypassed the Baathist infrastructure, the Iraqi Intelligence Service, and Special Republican Guard commanders, all the while fooling Saddam is, to put it mildly, a real stretch. To this day, many still fear the consequences of cooperating with the ISG. We would need to see the detailed rationale for Dr. Kay’s conclusions on this matter to gauge if Saddam was really fooled by scientists scared to death of him and the Baath Party, or if he ran one of military history’s most successful deception operations. If he did the latter, we must also ask why he would risk the toppling of his regime, and his death or capture, over non-existent WMDs. The only alternative explanation to these two questionable scenarios is that WMD stockpiles did in fact exist, but that they have been hidden, and/or spirited out of the country.

Dr. Kay and the ISG have already proven that Iraq was in violation of several UN resolutions. Their findings include, among others, that Iraq was involved in manufacturing of the biotoxin Ricin “right up to the end,” the restarting of Saddam’s nuclear program, and the development of BW “seed” agents, such as botulinum, that could be used to regenerate stockpiles of BW agents once UN sanctions were lifted.

Unfortunately, several factors worked against the ISG in locating actual stockpiles of WMDs. These factors included lack of analysis of historical data and preparation of an operational framework to focus the search, over-reliance on unsystematic interrogation of scientists, and poor operational monitoring and coordination of the search effort.

Some factors were beyond the ISG’s control. For example, the ISG faced a lack of resources (especially evident in the WMD and hazardous material clean-up effort), poor security of suspected WMD sites on the part of CJTF-7, and failure of US forces to prevent looting.

While the US examines the validity of national intelligence as it relates to Iraq’s WMD, it is also important to analyze the lessons of the ISG’s search operations. It would stand to reason that any continuing effort to find banned weapons would need to rely more on sound tactical intelligence preparation, and a careful handoff to experienced operational units. High-level intelligence assessments and collection efforts are not enough.



Douglas Hanson was a US Army cavalry reconnaissance officer for 20 years, and is a Gulf War I combat veteran. He has a background in radiation biology and physiology, and was an Atomic Demolitions Munitions (ADM) Security Officer, and a Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Defense Officer. As a civilian analyst, he has worked on stability and support operations in Bosnia, and helped develop a multi-service medical treatment manual for nuclear and radiological casualties. He was initially an operations officer in the operations/intelligence cell of the Requirements Coordination Office of the CPA, and was later assigned as the Chief of Staff of the Ministry of Science and Technology.

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...rticle_id=3399

[JackSpratts]

to sum up the flight of fancy above - "we didn't find anything, therefore they must (possibly) be there." evidence? no, of course not.

meanwhile back on earth, the un said yesterday inspections worked. iraq didn't have wmds.

- js.

[scooobiedooobie]

Originally posted by JackSpratts
to sum up the flight of fancy above - "we didn't find anything, therefore they must (possibly) be there." evidence? no, of course not.

meanwhile back on earth, the un said yesterday inspections worked. iraq didn't have wmds.

- js.

well, let's look at this objectively....

1. he was there in an official capacity, and has some impressive credentials to back him up.

2. the un = useless nitwits.

3. you are a tree hugging moonbat.


gee, i just don't know who is more credible....


i think i'll have to go with the "chief of staff in the iraqi ministry of science and technology" guy.

[JackSpratts]

Originally posted by scooobiedooobie
well, let's look at this objectively....

ok, let's. show me some of his objective evidence.

- js.

[scooobiedooobie]

Originally posted by JackSpratts
ok, let's. show me some of his objective evidence.

i already did.

yet more proof that you merely respond to posts without reading them.

[JackSpratts]

Originally posted by scooobiedooobie
i already did.

yet more proof that you merely respond to posts without reading them.

this your evidence?

''It may be that there are no large stockpiles, as Dr. Kay has stated.

It is entirely possible that the much sought-after WMD stockpiles may be literally right under the feet of coalition forces.''

where i come from that's called gas.

what i'd like to know is how you can make posts without reading them.

- js.