Saddam’s WMD Are Found — In Syria

Gidge

NES Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
10,471
Likes
6,655
Location
F.E.M.A. Region I
Feedback: 2 / 0 / 0
Mideast: The chemical weapons that Syria is preparing to use may have come from a stockpile that Iraq used against its own people and which the Russians helped transport to Syria before Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Investor's Business Daily

Syria’s chemical weapons are on the move, their precursor chemicals having been mixed, a crossing of a line drawn by President Obama Aug. 20 when he said “a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” So our resolute president decides to draw another line — that if Syria’s Bashar al-Assad makes use of those weapons, presumably against his own people or neighbors, he will face “consequences.”

Assad must be shaking in his boots, having dispatched 40,000 of his own people by more conventional means without any consequences from the United States. What’s another 10,000, Assad must be thinking, even if they go in a quicker and more ghastly way?

Obama’s appeasement has come home to roost. Assad remembers how Clinton, appearing on CBS’ “Face The Nation,” dismissed the idea of U.S. military action or regime change in Syria, claiming that unlike Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi, Assad was considered to be a “reformer” by “many of the members of Congress.”

He remembers how the Obama administration inexplicably made a recess appointment of Robert Ford to be ambassador to Damascus after President George W. Bush withdrew our ambassador in 2005. That was in response to the bombing that killed former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in which Syrian involvement was widely suspected.

Will Assad use chemical weapons as Saddam Hussein used nerve gas in 1988 to attack Kurds in the northern Iraqi town of Halabja, killing 5,000 men, women and children? Assad has shown no great regard for human life. If he does, it may be ironically with weapons from Hussein’s stash that were never accounted for.

Former Gen. Georges Sada, who served as No. 2 in the Iraqi Air Force under Saddam Hussein before he defected, wrote a comprehensive book in 2006 titled “Saddam’s Secrets.” It detailed how the Iraqi Revolutionary Guard moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the U.S.-led action to eliminate Hussein’s WMD threat by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.

Sada, who was appointed as national security adviser by interim leader Iyad Allawi and who was privy to many state secrets, described the transport of the deadly weapons in an interview with the New York Sun shortly after the book was published and said the weapons were received in Syria by a cousin of none other than President Assad “who is known variously as General Abu Ali, Abu Himma, or Zulhimawe.”

Sada counted 56 flights in all. “Special Republican Guard brigades loaded materials onto the planes . . . including ‘yellow barrels with skull and crossbones on each barrel.’ The pilots said there was also a ground convoy of trucks,” Sada stated.

An article in the fall 2005 Middle East Quarterly reports that on Israel’s Channel 2 on Dec. 23, 2002, Israel’s prime minister, Ariel Sharon, stated, “Chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria.”

Three months before Operation Iraqi Freedom began, Israeli intelligence detected Iraq moving large amounts of military material into Syria, material that could have included Saddam’s WMD.

Moshe Yaalon, who was Israel’s top general at the time, has said Iraq transported WMD to Syria six weeks before Operation Iraqi Freedom began.

Of course, Syria has long had a chemical weapons program of its own, making it easy to accept any WMD stocks Iraq had to offer and hide them among its existing inventory. Unless we stop drawing red lines and take some concrete action, Halabja 1988 may be repeated, and with some of the same weapons.
 
I, personally, was shocked when we were unable to find any chemical weapons in Iraq after the invasion. After all, we spent almost a decade shipping chemical weapons to Saddam, so why wouldn't there be some hanging around. My big question was why that made an invasion a good idea. The fact that there were no WMD there was pretty much irrelevant by that point.
 
No. The media told us there were no WMDs. Bush made it up. Sorry, they don't exist. It was all whipped up by a hateful movie.
 
They found WMD in Iraq anyways, i know personally. We even had chemical attacks on troops in country, over 100 in the course of the whole war, but that is never reported as well.First one was a sarin gas attack in a 155 shell in a rotary type area outside of Baghdad. But no, the news says no WMD's were found, it is bullshit.
 
Assad's chemical weapons, or lack thereof, are none of my business. Nor is it the business of the government or the citizens of the United States.
If the citizens off Syria have a problem with Assad or his preferred method of killing people it is their job to remove him from power. Good luck to them. I hope it goes well for them.
 
We should bring home every last one of our troops and let the people in the middle east kill each other if they want to. Oh, wait... what about the oil? That will never work.
 
We should bring home every last one of our troops and let the people in the middle east kill each other if they want to. Oh, wait... what about the oil? That will never work.

The oil in the middle east burns better then the oil in Alaska, Texas and off the gulf coast. And it's ECO friendly when other people get it out of the ground for us.
 
The oil in the middle east burns better then the oil in Alaska, Texas and off the gulf coast. And it's ECO friendly when other people get it out of the ground for us.
It's not that... It's just like the principle of "other peoples' money." Why use your own when you can use someone elses? Hold yours in reserve until you really need it.
 
My big question was why that made an invasion a good idea.
1. Iraq lost the first war
2. When you win a war, the loser gets only the degree of soveriegnty granted by the winner. We gave them too much.
3. Iraq continued to fire at US aircraft patrolling the country
4. #3 along provided sufficient reason to kill the leaders and remove the government if Iraq. Wartime victories have consequences, and a defeated nation must accept its role as the loser. The US failed to make that happen and set the stage for more trouble in not doing so.
5. Occupying the country after removing the government as a disciplinary measure was not necessarily a good idea.
 
This was known about back the start of the war but the press did not report on it because it did not it their agenda.
 
Back
Top Bottom