Laurie Mylroie on the mystery of the Iraqi WMDs
posted at 12:52 pm on January 29, 2008 by Bryan
Interesting report from Laurie Mylroie. She is responding to the recent 60 Minutes report that Saddam claimed to have tricked the world into thinking that he still had WMDs in order to keep the Iranians from invading. The side angle of that, if it’s true, is that 8 years of Clinton had convinced Saddam Hussein that he had more to fear from Iran than from the US. That would be in spite of the Clinton administration bombing Iraq in 1998 and 2000, and having struck al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan and that alleged al Qaeda-Iraq WMD factory in Sudan. The fact that in all of those cases and the effort in the former Yugoslavia were limited to air power might have informed Hussein’s thinking. The fact that the US outsourced much of its foreign policy to the UN, which was in turn corrupted by Saddam’s petrodollar kickbacks, might have led him to think that an invasion remained off the table even after Bush took office in 2001.
In any case, Mylroie is well connect, informed and always worth reading. Read the whole thing.
The Iraq Survey Group learned that Iraqi intelligence operated five biological laboratories until the start of OIF. In 2004, the Pentagon debated whether to release a cache of captured Iraqi documents. Individuals familiar with those papers say they justified the war. Then Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Stephen Cambone, however, argued against publicly releasing them, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld sided with Cambone. Subsequently, a handful of those documents were leaked to a small on-line news service.
Among the leaked Iraqi papers is one detailing the production of small amounts of anthrax and another detailing the production of small amounts of mustard gas. Such quantities could be used for terrorism.
Ronald Kessler also interviewed Piro, and Kessler’s latest book, The Terrorist Watch, includes three important points absent from the 60 Minutes interview. First, “Saddam was very smart — a lot smarter than we gave him credit for in the West,” Piro told Kessler. Second, “after Desert Storm [the 1991 war], Saddam considered himself to be at war with the United States,” Piro explained. Finally, Saddam’s foremost concern was his legacy. Before OIF began, Saddam was offered a comfortable exile in Saudi Arabia, but Saddam told Piro “he cared more about what people would think of him in five hundred or a thousand years than they did that day.”
These observations knock down two views embraced by Middle East experts after the 1991 war that helped buttress Bill Clinton’s do-nothing policy toward Iraq — that Saddam was “stupid” and that his foremost concern was his own survival and the survival of his regime. Taken together, Piro’s three observations suggest that sometime in the future, when Operation Iraqi Freedom is no longer a political football, Americans will likely learn that Saddam was indeed a major threat and that he was not idle in the 12 years between the end of the 1991 war and the start of the second war.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
This woman and Michael Medved (the Bigfoot believer) must be the only two people on Earth who think the alleged WMD went to Syria, or Hoboken, or Sesame Street or …
corona on January 29, 2008 at 12:58 PM
The 60min interview was interesting. The claim that Saddam didn’t expect to be invaded until it was too late is not a new one. It was in the CIA’s Duelfer Report, in the interim Kay report, in numerous msm reports, and expressed by several regime inner circle members. What’s ignored in the spin here is something even more important though.
WHY did Saddam think the US would only launch a few days of air attacks he could easily survive?
Answer: because the previous history of US military action (air strikes) had not killed Bin Laden, hadn’t killed Saddam after almost a decade of tries, didn’t resolve the Kosovo issue (recall it was the threat of ground forces that did that), and he reasonably looked at post Vietnam US history, saw the US had no stomach for ground action, saw a string of impotent air-power-only strikes, and came to the same conclusion Bin Laden had: America was a paper tiger. Had it not been for GWB, they both would have been right. It was the years and years of impotent air-power-only military actions that gave Saddam too much confidence, and prevented him from being deterred into compliance peacefully.
Procrastination has a price
scottm on January 29, 2008 at 1:01 PM
Why the Bush admin is sitting on this information is insane. Even if it’s only a little proof it’s better than nothing. All the stories over the years about little bits of poison gas here and anthrax there, burried fighter planes, long range rockets with missing warheads and mysterious 50 gallon drums marked as syrup or something. I just don’t get it.
HotAirExpert on January 29, 2008 at 1:02 PM
Sorry, corona, they ain’t the only ones. Israeli guy I know told me they were in the Bekka Valley in Syria. Of course, I’m of the opinion that the WMD from Iraq got bombed in September during the IAF raid. I’ll ask him though. He probably won’t actually say, “Yes”, but you know them Israelis. Stonewalling is the national sport.
Of course, he’s also the guy who told what Yassar Arafat really died of so I tend to believe his stories (AIDS, don’t cha know).
mjk on January 29, 2008 at 1:03 PM
What’s that? Saddam wasn’t trustworthy?
Thank God we don’t have that kind of problem with Ahmadinejad since he canned his nuclear ambitions.
We need a dialogue, right Dems?
fogw on January 29, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Not so go do soome research at World Net Daily. And what happened to those “small” amounts?
RedLizard64 on January 29, 2008 at 1:07 PM
I take it your of the belief that WMD didn’t exist? Is that what you’re saying?
pistolero on January 29, 2008 at 1:10 PM
Iraq is something that had to be done and Bush had the balls to do it. Whether it was to stop an evil dictator,secure oil, bring a Western influence into the region, free a people-spread democracy….. Take your pick
Drtuddle on January 29, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Bush just got tired of getting beaten up on and crawled under his desk a few years ago – effectively conceding the rhetorical battle to the MSM and the far left.
ErikTheRed on January 29, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Well, I have always believed there were WMD and that Bush was a great man and President. There has always been proof if this but libs just choose to ignore it. Gotta Remeber that after Saddamn was captured lib’s have 24/7 said how bad the war was and that Bush Lied so poeple who dont watch the news are or stupid think bush actuly lied. Also i blame poeple like Hanity and BIll O cause ive seen them let libtards sit there and say
1. Bush lied about WMD – there is more proof he told the truth than he lied, but poeple let these lies be told and never challenge them in a public forum
2. Bush ruin the Economy – Truth is, economy was sharply declining after Clinton – Also our GDP and the DOW have been hitting record highs ever since Bush became president even after 9/11 our GDP has grown more since ’01 to ’6 than in entire Clinton president – so much for “clinton was president over the largest economic growth in histroy” nope Thats bush (also clinton can thank RR for that )
3. Bush went to war because of oil!! — Yeah thats why oil prices are 3$ a gal, if you think this then you are retarded, even though we should be getting oil from iraq at much higher rates we dont. The real problem here is Lib’s not letting us drill in ANWAR, Wyoming , Fl or Cal .
4. Bush is a idiot – and CLinton is a traitor who dodged the draft
5. We are loosing the war in iraq its Vietnam!! – Wrong again sucka , Every REAL Marine i know say the poeple love us, its relativly safe over there and they are doing a great thing .. phoney soidlers anyone? We were not loosing Vietnam, we lost the war in Vietnam in a place called WASHINGING DC.
6. Bush kicks ass and is a great man – yeap he is a good man, has balls
7. I want to marry Michelle Malkin!!
Donut on January 29, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Some lucky guy beat ya to her.
infidel on January 29, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Sad but true. It’s amazing how much goes on under that thing.
saint kansas on January 29, 2008 at 1:27 PM
Make that three !!!
OBX Pete on January 29, 2008 at 1:27 PM
I hope one day we actually will know, but there is a LOT of circumstantial evidence that says that is exactly what happened.
The load of pseudo-evidence is such that if it were a murder trial, a guilty verdict might be in the wings.
TheGoblinKing on January 29, 2008 at 1:30 PM
Medved believes in me? How nice!
Bigfoot on January 29, 2008 at 1:34 PM
Did we ever find out the source of the Anthrax attack after 9/11?
If this is true, it just goes to show how much of a paper tiger that Saddam and the rest of the world viewed us. My guess his Saddam’s conspirators at the UN, French, German and Russian business and political leaders, not to mention Traitors like the Houston Oil Man, assured him they could keep Bush from invading.
Had bush bowed down to Saddam, it would’ve been used against him politically I think also. No telling what Saddam would’ve done, but imagine if somehow the Oil for Food scandal had still come out, with our “oil man” president.
jp on January 29, 2008 at 1:34 PM
I’m still pissed about all this “oops, we made a mistake on WMDs” nonsense… First, anyone who calls Bush a liar (or says things along those lines) is a piece of sh** and should be ashamed of themselves… As always, I have to point out that we had the Democrats (both Clintons, Albright, Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Rockefeller, Reid, etc. etc.) making the case for WMDs in Iraq. It’s no secret that Clinton bombed them after making a speech that was more strongly worded than Bush’s, and only a month after he made regime change our policy!
Does anyone really think that Saddam, in an effort to fool Iran, simply “tricked” us? Come on!
Now, no one ever talks about those millions of documents and thousands of hours of tapes we captured that were supposed to be slowly released… What ever happened after those first few were dumped to appease us? I mean, there was some interesting stuff there, but nothing that would shut the left up for even a moment.
Where are they now? Bush didn’t get us in to the war dishonestly, but I feel like he’s being dishonest now in hiding a WMD smoking gun… I can only hope it’s because there are ongoing covert actions in other countries tracking every last bit of the WMD down.
Now, setting aside the fact that EVERYONE (even our “allies” who opposed the war) believed he had WMDs, which makes it incredibly unlikely that he didn’t, we also have the satellite photos of trucks crossing in to Syria at the start of the war, we have General Sada’s statements (among others), etc. etc. etc.
Oh, and before I forget… remember the “exclusive” tape ABC aired a couple of years ago? It showed Saddam talking mysteriously about how we (the US) could easily suffer from a WMD attack (I believe he specified DC), and he talked in weird language that made it sound like he was saying it could be done by a terrorist group if we just let them have some Anthrax. Basically Saddam sounded like he was considering a way to attack us without leaving his fingerprints… This could be easily accomplished by allowing suicidal Al Qaeda members to do the dirty work.
Of course that meaning in his words was just one interpretation, by why would he be talking about WMD attacks on the US at all? It was revealing tape either way.
Then, does everyone remember the story that the media wasn’t exactly hyping (but should have been), which was confirmation of Saddam’s contacts with Al Qaeda and plans to have operational contacts in the future? The wires picked it up, but it wasn’t anything that made the front pages or top of the newscasts.
But what really steams me, above all of that, is that we never hear anything about David Gaubatz’s findings:
http://www.nysun.com/article/27183
I really wish something would come of that, but I’ve hardly heard anything about it other than that article.
RightWinged on January 29, 2008 at 1:37 PM
WMD LIES!!!
-fyi, those “lies” come from the UN inspectors; Unresolved Disarmament Issues report March 6, 2003, Dr Hans Blix
scottm on January 29, 2008 at 1:37 PM
The Israeli report came out at some point that the weapons that were there were exported, possibly to Syria. That made sense and Israeli intelligence is usually spot-on.
The point that seems to get missed by the Liberal intelligentsia is that Iraq had and used biological weapons. They were allied with terror organizations and supported the destruction of Israel and the US. They were engaging our fighter cover over the no-fly zone, which was there to protect people of Iraq from further genocide by their leader.
The need to invade Iraq was a no brainer. The war was over in a few weeks, and we’ve been fighting Jihadists on the ground there in order to secure the Gulf. It was the right thing to do……period.
Hening on January 29, 2008 at 1:38 PM
Why does it matter if there were WMD’s…Is there a shelf life for killing people and it being bad. What do you think would happen to Iraq had we not stepped in? If you think it would be better you are kidding yourself. We should have ended this the first go around…we didn’t and the Iraq of the first and second wars was profoundly different because of it. We always talk about helping and makinga difference…but when given a great chance to do so the world turned its collective back in a most callous way.
tomas on January 29, 2008 at 1:38 PM
I mean when saddam leaves power do you think it would be better than us getting involved?
tomas on January 29, 2008 at 1:40 PM
From the 60 Minutes report, I concluded that Saddam was desirous of a limited strike against him over alleged WMD to perfect the illusion that he had them.
I am glad that we attacked Baathist Iraq for one reason alone, which is that we averted a nuclear arms race between Iraq and Iran. Imagine dealing with a nuclear Iran while having not dealt Iraq any meaningful consequences for circumventing resolutin compliance. Imagine further that Saddam declared, to maintain regional stability, he would meet Iran’s threat, weapon for weapon, regardless of international sanctions/pressure otherwise. He would have done so believing that we would not destroy a military, his military, that we counted on to balance the forces of our real enemy: Iran.
After all, wasn’t that our reasoning in 1991?
Another interesting aspect of this discussion is the reports that Iraqi scientists led Saddam to believe he had imminent WMD capability, when in fact he didn’t but wasn’t in the mood to be told so. Whatever Saddam had long range plans to do may have fallen flat at the moment he turned to his weaponmeisters and found them… on vacation. Perhaps he learned that within weeks or even days of the invasion?
BTW, this idea that Saddam was smart. Yes, he was, but his ego trumped his brains. He played chess without analyzing his opponent beyond the most recent moves. He fought and lost the Gulf War I because he counted on an historically bad US-Russian-Chinese relationship that had changed without him noticing, and he fought and lost his last one because he did not understand how 9-11 affected the nation’s willingness to fight another war.
shuzilla on January 29, 2008 at 1:51 PM
I’ve said for years that the WMDs made it into Syria. I think there’s good reason the IDF bombed a mysterious Syrian ‘factory’ back in Sept. 2007.
locomotivebreath1901 on January 29, 2008 at 1:56 PM
Not so go do soome research at World Net Daily. And what happened to those “small” amounts?
RedLizard64
Ok, so do you have a credible source a fellow like me might wish to peruse or is that the best we have? World Net Daily indeed.
It’s pretty clear at this point that Saddam was playing a shell game whilst waiting for sanctions to be lifted. Without 9-11, they probably would have been done next year. Then he would have his WMD and so forth. Taking him out was the correct thing to do, but let this WMD thing go.
Krydor on January 29, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Kid Rock summed it up best. When asked for his thoughts on the invasion of Iraq he basically said, ‘I dunno too much about it, but I know he’s a bad guy, and good guys should always kick ass on bad guys.’
I believe he later added, bawitaba da dangadang diggy
scottm on January 29, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Keep coming back…
Rick on January 29, 2008 at 2:01 PM
If true, he completely misunderstood the impact of 9/11 and ignored what we did in Afghanistan. Could he be that oblivious? Doubtful. More likely he thought he paid Russia, France, Germany and China for protection and bet wrong.
TheBigOldDog on January 29, 2008 at 2:02 PM
LMAO
trubble on January 29, 2008 at 2:05 PM
this is the point I’ve tried to make to people I know.
there are a significant number of people on the Right(Conservative, evangelicals, etc.) that have bought into the Soros funded B.S. on this whole subject. And now think that we were ‘unjust’ and some even we were ‘lied to’ on the issue.
jp on January 29, 2008 at 2:06 PM
Sorry, I think you’re outvoted here.
Interesting you mention that mjk…
What about Georges Sada?
Suihei Deloi on January 29, 2008 at 2:07 PM
Good greif Saddam was playing the long game not a short one. Didnt matter if he had one bomb with a WMD in it wouldnt have taken him long to buiild them since he already had the technology.
Saddam’s game was always to get sanctions removed and rebuild his WMD program. He had the Chinese and Russians and French in his pocket using his oil and good bribes at the UN.
All saddam had to do was destroy his existing WMD program, Claim he was clean then within 2 to 5 years after sanctions were lifted he would have everything back. The hardware of WMDs never mattered it was the technology that did.
During the late 1990s Saddam had the French and Russians repeatedly ask for removal of sanctions “because” they caused civilian suffering
(Which was a lie because humanitarian aid was never cut off. Saddam simply starved his people to get rid of sanctions to the point the UN set up the food for oil program to feed his people when he refused to do so)
Again it was always a game and the UN and other natiosn played it with Saddam against the US. And its sad that the game is still played today.
William Amos on January 29, 2008 at 2:08 PM
How does the existance or non-existance matter in regards to what we do in Iraq now? As far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t.
Hollowpoint on January 29, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Stephen Hayes’ book, The Connection, goes into great detail on the links between Saddam and al Qaeda. Hayes is from the Weekly Standard if you distrust World Net Daily.
pistolero on January 29, 2008 at 2:19 PM
the narrative that “bush lied” and we went into an “unnecessary war”, etc. Is the emotional source, combined with the bombing and ‘insurgency’(death toll) of the Cut and Run crowd. And those that want to punish the GOP for it.
jp on January 29, 2008 at 2:29 PM
Go read “Saddams Secrets” by Iraqi General Georges Sada.
On Amazon for only $16.49 new and $1.93 used. For a low low price you too can avoid exploiting your ignorance.
Buttercup on January 29, 2008 at 2:29 PM
Check this out: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1472699/posts
Fritz Hollins, on Sept. 12, 2002 connected 9/11 to Bin Laden and its in the Senate Record for that day. he read and put into record an Iraqi Newspaper editorial predicting 9/11 by Bin laden and named the targets metaphorically. The newstory was from July 23, 2001 in this State run newspaper.
Scroll down and check out the links that poster: sam_paine has gathered there.
jp on January 29, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Good article. I believe that some WMD went into Syria, but most is still in Iraq. Iraq is roughly the size of Texas, and being from Texas, I know that’s a huge area to inspect. They could put 1000 inspectors in Texas for several years and not be able to cover the whole state. Sure, they could easily inspect in cities and along highways and county roads, but there are a lot of ranches where inspectors would never find anything the government was trying hide from them. Iraq probably has as many, if not more, remote areas than Texas.
txsurveyor on January 29, 2008 at 2:37 PM
So why play their game? We should be hammering the Dems for living in the past and being motivated by politics over doing what’s right where Republicans are focusing on how to best deal with the current situation.
Hollowpoint on January 29, 2008 at 2:50 PM
my problem with it is I’ve seen it make its way into Conservative side of the aisle(some are Ron Paul supporters), and they beleive we acted “unjustly” into an “unnecessary war”. The problem is their basis for this is this junk that started by the political left, who have blurred the whole issue.
I don’t care about the left, but don’t want the “America First” crowd to have any type of comeback on the right.
jp on January 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Laurie Mylorie sources are excellent. She knows of what she speaks. The “Bush Lies” thing has always been totally bogus, everyone and their brother thought Saddam was doing it. The fact is that BillyJefff substantively underfunded and hamstrung both the military and our intelligence services because it did not help him in his daily pleasures.
What is important now is to relate this to Iran. Iran is creating fissile material for a bomb. They have made that very clear. They intend to use the bomb in reality or for blackmail. We need to take out Iran’s capabilities NOW and not wait, but I think Pres Bush has already retreated to Crawford. He just told Hamas and Fatah that it it OK to continue terrorism and we will send them money and give them another terrorist state. Bush has surrendered and all this “bush lied” crowd can take credit for the being the Neville Chamberlains of our time and bringing on the next major war that could have and should have been avoided.
georgealbert on January 29, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Deadly chemicals are found dumped in river
Shattering Conventional Wisdom About Saddam’s WMD’s
WMD lies; see also Rockefeller Memo
btw, anyone ever seen that Sen Intel Com Phase II report that Reid complained about
Senate Closes Doors to Discuss Iraq Probe
How strange. They complain the Bush Admin was blocking the report from being released, and three years later, after having taken the senate for well over a year…
…no report. Gosh, guess the White House is making the Dems hold back from releasing it OR…the Bush Lied mantra was just hype, and the gullible bought it.
scottm on January 29, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Corona – “… must be the only two people on Earth who think the alleged WMD went to Syria …”
Try reading “Saddam’s Secrets” by former Iraqi Air Force general, Georges Sada. You might change your mind.
Tony737 on January 29, 2008 at 3:18 PM
pistolero on January 29, 2008 at 3:20 PM
pistolero hits a bullseye
scottm on January 29, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Expert – “Why the Bush admin is sitting on this information is insane.”
It doesn’t make any sense, does it? I guess they figure nobody will give a crap anyway. In the book “Hard Corps” the Marines find evidence of Saddam conducting horrible experiments on babies. BABIES! We should just tell the world that we did it “for the chillllldren”. Even without finding the NBCs, Taking out Saddam was STILL the right thing to do. Pre-9/11, containment was good enough, but anymore.
Tony737 on January 29, 2008 at 3:24 PM
They went looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction and found thousands of mass graves instead. Very Dr. Strangelove.
RobCon on January 29, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Go read “Saddams Secrets” by Iraqi General Georges Sada. – ButterCup
Sorry, didn’t mean to steal your line, I guess I oughta read all the other comments before making my own. (Hangs head in shame)
Why do ya build me up, Buttercup baby, just to let me down, and mess me around? And then worst, ya never call baby when ya say will, but I love ya still. I need YOU (I need YOU) more than anyone darlin’, ya know that I have from the staaaart. So build me up, (build me up) ButterCup, don’t break my heaaaart.
Tony737 on January 29, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Some of Saddam’s WMDs went to Syria and some went to Bekka(sp wrong for sure). John Loftus reported on a Jordanian seizure of an Iraqi truck at their border with 20 tons of the crap on it, reported on Jordanian TV.
dogsoldier on January 29, 2008 at 4:17 PM
Word has it, that is what THIS is all about.
Conservative_SAHM on January 29, 2008 at 4:20 PM
QFT.
NeoconNews.com on January 29, 2008 at 4:34 PM
Ah, hit submit too soon. I can’t really blame Bush for moving on beyond the WMD deal, even if he had ground to stand on. The backlash from the MSM was massive.
NeoconNews.com on January 29, 2008 at 4:35 PM
“WHY did Saddam think the US would only launch a few days of air attacks he could easily survive?”
I read the French told Sadaam that they would stop the US from invading.
Additionally, The Iraq Survey Group, when it reported to Congress, revealed that Sadaam’s scientists were still in place so he could have reconstituted the programs at any time. I should say the scientists who had not yet been assasinated. They were being killed off as the ISG asked to talk with them.
davod on January 29, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Corona’s the type of commenter who lobs a grenade into a crowd of conservatives, then splits the scene, effectively hijacking a thread. We have a name for people like this…
Bryan, I’m tellin’ ya’, one click on your end and Corona could be gone forever.
CliffHanger on January 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM
It works if you work it.
mikeyboss on January 29, 2008 at 5:10 PM
I just saw something on the History channel that was discussing the Anthrax scare and they were basically concluding that the US must have given anthrax to terrorists because we’re the only ones capable of producing it in such high grades. Consider the History channel officially biased.
I will say that throughout the military a lot of us are comfortable with knowing that Iraq had the resources and intent to produce WMD, but not actually seeing them. If you’ve ever seen western Iraq you would understand…we find new stuff buried out there all the time. They buried entire airfields for goodness sakes…
blankminde on January 29, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Read “The Bomb in my Garden” by Mahdi Obeidi.
Iraqi atomic scientists were not assassinated as part of anyone’s program.
gabriel sutherland on January 29, 2008 at 7:02 PM
Corona, you are fool who chooses to be ignorant.
To add to what scottm provided:
Below is information taken from a book titled, “The United Nations and the Iraq-Kuwait Conflict 1990-1996″.
It was still for sale at the UN web site at:
http://www.un.org/Pubs/modelun/bluebook.htm
but being the UN, they like to hide the book.
There is a press release at:
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/1996/19960221.pi933.html
announcing the publication of the book, but they have removed it from sale at their web site.
Below are word-for-word excerpts from the book showing what the UN (and member countries including Euroweenies) knew about Iraq, since the book is a collection of reports to the Security Council.
Remember, some of the chemical weapons were found (46,000 to put a number to it) but much of the biological weapon program was just being uncovered when Mad Halfbright and Bubba managed to get the inspectors kicked out in 1998.
18 April 1991 In Iraq’s first declaration regarding weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, denies having weapons grade nuclear material, a biological weapons program or any super guns. It also
declares holdings of ballistic missiles and chemical weapons.
7-18 July 1991 The third IAEA inspection uncovers large stocks of natural uranium and 15 kilograms of highly enriched uranium, and reveals the existence of various uranium enrichment programs.
2-8 August 1991 UNSCOM conducts its first biological inspection of Iraqi facilities and uncovers a major biological program. Seed stocks of three biological warfare agents are handed over to the team, and the team removes three further potential warfare strains.
21 February-24 March 1992 The first chemical destruction team destroys 463 nerve agent filled rockets, i.e. approximately 2.5 tons of agent.
1 July 1995 Iraq admits to having had a full-scale offensive biological weapons program.
Note the date! It took 4 YEARS after the war for Iraq to admit having a biological weapon program!
25 October 1991 Report by Executive Chairman of UNSCOM
Iraq acknowledged possessing 46,000 filled chemical weapons stored at various sites throughout Iraq.
The team examined 30 chemical filled ballistic missile warheads declared by Iraq in the Dujayl area. 14 were binary type filled with isopropanol and
cyclohexanol with only DF needing to be added to produce nerve agent prior to use. 56 plastic containers of DF were found. Iraq stated 16 warheads were filled with a mixture of GB and GF nerve agents.
At Al Bakr Air Base, 25 type 250 gauge aerial bombs and 135 type 500 aerial bombs filled with mustard agent were declared by Iraq.
At Al Fallujah Proving Ground, Iraq declared the storage of 6,394 mustard-filled 155-millimeter artillery shells. Analysis confirmed the presence of mustard agent.
Iraq has declared 6,120 sarin nerve agent filled 122-millimeter rocket warheads and their attendant motors.
Iraq provided seed stocks of biological warfare agents to the team consisting of Clostridium botulinum, Clostridium perfringens and Bacillus
anthracis. Iraq also possessed the following micro-organisms-Brucellus abortus, Brucella melitensis, Francisella tularensis and various strains
of Clostridium botulinum.
Report by the IAEA to the Security Council by Hans Blix
Yes. The idiot Blix who claimed Iraq was not a threat.
These consisted of 68 fuel assemblies of 36% enrichment with a U-235 content of 1.27 Kilograms. In addition, there was a set of fresh fuel plates for the Tamus-2 reactor (French MTR type) with an enrichment
of 93% and a total U-235 content of 372 grams.
Since the declarations of 18 and 27 April, inspections have resulted in some 400 tons of additional material being declared by Iraq—natural
uranium in many forms, ranging from yellowcake to processed chemicals…Much of the material had been concealed by dispersion or burial in desert areas.
The major discovery has been that of the Electromagnetic Isotope Separation (EMIS) program and its extent. A major concealment effort was made by Iraq to hide the existence of its program from inspectors, equipment being dispersed and in many cases buried in remote areas.
The removal from Iraq of the remaining 35 kilograms of U-235 contained in the irradiated fuel elements of the Tamuz-2 and IRT 5000 research reactors is one of the major tasks still pending.
Special Report of the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM 18 February 1992
In relation to the biological weapons, Iraq clearly violated its obligations to hand over to the Commission all its biological weapons-related items when it destroyed buildings at Salman Pak immediately prior to the first Commission inspection there.
Explanations provided to date, including those given most recently to the special mission, have not been convincing.
Third Report of the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM 16 June 1992
A new development was the Iraqi admission of 19 March 1992 that it had omitted to declare 24,470 chemical munitions and these weapons had been unilaterally destroyed in direct contravention of resolution 687.
Wake the hell up! That is over 24,000 chemical weapons Saddam CLAIMED to have destroyed. Much of the problem with the inspectors was with their being unable to verify destruction.
Fourth Report of the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM 17 December 1992
The agents which Iraq had available were mustard agent, the nerve agents GB and GF (and also about 70 tons of “spoiled” GA) and small research quantities of three other nerve agents. The total quantities
involved are approximately 250-300 tons.
The number and quantity of munitions and agent destroyed by the Special Commission as of 14 December 1992 were on the order of:
5,000 sarin-filled 122mm rockets
44,500 liters of GB/GF
120 liters of GB
5,000 liters of D4
1,100 liters of dichlorethane
16.5 tons of thiodiglycol
5.5 tons of mustard agent
Again, notice what was destroyed by the UN, and the lack of any data concerning biological weapons!
The foot and mouth disease plant at Daura was converted to biological weapons production of botulinum toxin. The plant was used for production of botulinum toxin from November 1990 until 15 January 1991 by which time 5,400 liters of concentrated toxin had been produced. Production of perfringens for biological weapons began at Al Hakam in August 1990. A
total of 340 liters of concentrated perfringens was produced.
Weaponization of biological warfare agents began on a large scale in December 1990 at Muthanna. R400 bombs were selected as the appropriate munition for aerial delivery and 100 were filled with botulinum
toxin, 50 with anthrax, and 16 with aflatoxin. In addition, 25 Al Hussein warheads were filled with botulinum toxin (13), anthrax (10), and aflatoxin (2).
These weapons were then deployed at four locations in early January 1991 during the war.
In summary, Iraq has declared the production of at least 19,000 liters of concentrated botulinum toxin, (nearly 10,000 liters were filled into munitions), 8,500 liters of concentrated anthrax (some 6,500 liters were filled into munitions) and 2,200 liters of concentrated aflatoxin (1,580 liters were filled into munitions).
In spite of the substantial new disclosures made by Iraq in August 1995, the Commission does not believe that Iraq has given a full and correct account of its biological weapons program.
91Veteran on January 29, 2008 at 10:00 PM
Based on what the UN inspectors found prior to 2003, and what the US military has likely found since then, I suspect Bush has kept quiet about what was found for a few reasons.
First among them would likely be the amount of materiel found that came directly from some of our supposed “allies” on the Security Council such as Russia, France, Germany or China.
The other big reason I suspect he kept quiet was to put pressure on the UN to reform, and to allow them (the UN) to keep some sort of credibility after failing miserably at enforcing their previous and current decisions.
I cannot fathom any other reason why he would take the beating he has over this.
91Veteran on January 29, 2008 at 10:13 PM
I bet the dow is up 2 notes tomorrow.
THE CHOSEN ONE on January 29, 2008 at 11:29 PM
This is true, we KNOW that Saddam was hiding Russian and (was it Syrian?) scientists from the inspectors. This, to my recollection, was proven. And that reminds me, I used to believe that Bush was keeping quiet about the WMDs we’ve found because we were trying to get Russia’s help with Iran. But I’ve always said “f*** Russia”, they are NOT our ally. Burn that bridge and get it over with.
And for those who replied to me but were talking more specifically about Saddam/AQ connections.. that’s all interesting stuff, but that’s not what the article I linked to was about. Follow that article, it’s one of the most shocking things about this whole WMD situation I’ve read, and it’s OLD now.
RightWinged on January 30, 2008 at 7:46 PM