October 07, 2004

The Duelfer Report and Kerry's Own Words

No one is opposing the conclusions of the Iraq Survey Group on whether Saddam's Iraq had WMD. What's interesting and scarry is how quickly Saddam thought he could restart his weapons programs once international sanctons were lifted (via Power Line):

Saddam asked in 1999 how long it would take to build a production line for CW [chemical weapons] agents, accordingto the former Minister of Military Industrialization. Huwaysh investigated and responded that experts could readily prepare a production line for mustard, which could be produced within six months. VX and Sarin production was more complicated and would take longer. Huwaysh relayed this answer to Saddam, who never requested follow-up information. An Iraqi CW expert separately estimated Iraq would require only a few days to start producing mustard—if it was prepared to sacrifice the production equipment.

Imad Husayn ‘Ali Al ‘Ani, closely tied to Iraq’s VX program, alleged that Saddam had been looking for chemical weapons scientists in 2000 to begin production in a second location, according to reporting.

It doesn't matter if vast quantities of WMD weren't found if production could be easily and quickly started. After a few months, Saddam could have passed on WMD to Islamist terrorists. Then who would have been a victim, Israel, Great Britain, the U.S.? How about Saddam blackmailing the U.S. to remove all military forces from the Middle East so he could become the dominant player? As a U.S. Senator said in 2002,

Who can say that this master of miscalculation will not develop a weapon of mass destruction even greater--a nuclear weapon--then reinvade Kuwait, push the Kurds out, attack Israel, any number of scenarios to try to further his ambitions to be the pan-Arab leader or simply to confront in the region, and once again miscalculate the response, to believe he is stronger because he has those weapons?

And while the administration has failed to provide any direct link between Iraq and the events of September 11, can we afford to ignore the possibility that Saddam Hussein might accidentally, as well as purposely, allow those weapons to slide off to one group or other in a region where weapons are the currency of trade? How do we leave that to chance?

The Senator who said those words was none other than Sen. John Kerry. He was correct then. What does he say now? "You don't make up or find reasons to go to war after the fact." In 2002, Kerry believed the same conventional wisdom as Bush that Saddam had WMD. Kerry was just as wrong as the President, yet he hasn't admitted he was wrong. At least the President has. Kerry has the audacity to claim Bush and Cheney "won't face the truth about Iraq." He won't even face the truth of his own words.

But Kerry can't say he was as wrong as the President. Agreeing with your opponent doesn't give voters a reason to dump the other guy. Through the Democratic primaries and into the general election we've seen and heard John Kerry take multiple positions on issues to win his party's nomination and to best position himself against Bush. The political posturing continues.

"Saddam Worked Secretly on WMDs"

"U.S. Report Finds Iraqis Eliminated Illicit Arms in 90's"

"Bush, Cheney Concede Saddam Had No WMDs"

"President Bush Shares Hopeful Vision After Seeing America's Spirit Through Good Times and Bad"