Saddam's Big Secret!

[DawnCt1]

This interview, scheduled to air on 60 Minutes gives clear insight into why the intelligence was wrong. The lack of WMDs was a closely guarded secret held by Saddam for the purpose of thwarting an Iranian invasion. He also makes it clear that he had the means, ability and the engineers in place to restore the WMDs he had and pursue the rest, including nuclear. Clearly he had the funds directed from the UN by the Oil for Food program.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/24/60minutes/main3749494.shtml
"Saddam still wouldn't admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there would be military action against him because of the perception he did. Because, says Piro, "For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that [faking having the weapons] would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq," he tells Pelley.

He also intended and had the wherewithal to restart the weapons program. "Saddam] still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there," says Piro. "He wanted to pursue all of WMD…to reconstitute his entire WMD program." This included chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, Piro says. "

 

[NewJersey]

Are you seriously trying to say the faulty intelligence was Saddam's fault?

It would say much worse things for our President and intelligence agencies, if we simply base our intelligence on what some crazy dictator says.

Am I really understanding this right? You are saying that because Saddam wouldn't back down from his claim to have WMD's so we just believed him without any fault on our intelligence and invaded?

 

[DawnCt1]

Are you seriously trying to say the faulty intelligence was Saddam's fault?

It would say much worse things for our President and intelligence agencies, if we simply base our intelligence on what some crazy dictator says.

Am I really understanding this right? You are saying that because Saddam wouldn't back down from his claim to have WMD's so we just believed him without any fault on our intelligence and invaded?

I think its a multifaceted issue dating back to the days when the Church committee effectively gutted the CIA and during the 1990's when it was discovered that sometimes CIA operatives had to deal with people and countries weren't big on "human rights" and we limited our human assets in favor of "monitoring". When a dictator wants to create an illusion within a totalitarian, secret society, and it is impossible to infiltrate that with operatives, particularly since that wasn't the focus in the 90's, the reasons why the intel was faulty is obvious. Additionally, it is clear that he had the means and ability to restore his WMDs and pursue others when the sanctions would eventually be lifted. France had sought several times to have the sanctions lifted.

 

[GeorgeG]

I get it, Dawn. Unfortunately, there are many people who are hung up on the "Bush lied" bandwagon that if we dug up a fully operational nuclear weapon hidden somewhere in Bagdad, they would insist it was a CIA plant.

The intelligence community has never been perfect, and probably never will be. Even the Normandy invasion back in 1944 involved faulty intelligence. Radical Muslim organizations are particularly difficult to get close to, let alone infiltrate. Saddam may not have had the weapons he was believed to have, but it's always been clear he desired them and would not hesitate to use them.

 

[StrollPatrolMom]

This interview, scheduled to air on 60 Minutes gives clear insight into why the intelligence was wrong. The lack of WMDs was a closely guarded secret held by Saddam for the purpose of thwarting an Iranian invasion. He also makes it clear that he had the means, ability and the engineers in place to restore the WMDs he had and pursue the rest, including nuclear. Clearly he had the funds directed from the UN by the Oil for Food program.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/24/60minutes/main3749494.shtml
"Saddam still wouldn't admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there would be military action against him because of the perception he did. Because, says Piro, "For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that [faking having the weapons] would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq," he tells Pelley.

He also intended and had the wherewithal to restart the weapons program. "Saddam] still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there," says Piro. "He wanted to pursue all of WMD…to reconstitute his entire WMD program." This included chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, Piro says. "

**Stomps Feet** Well, if George Soros didn't fund this study, I don't believe it.

That is an interesting theory...I guess since its not on Fox News a certain segment of a certain political party cannot just automatically dismiss it without digging a little deeper.

 

[Acklander]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/24/60minutes/main3749494.shtml
"Saddam still wouldn't admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there would be military action against him because of the perception he did. "

this isn't new news. I read about this before we even invaded Iraq, so I suspect the goverment was aware that he was trying to create an illusion.

Then again, I also read that Saddam offered to step down and go into exile before we attacked. Think about how many lives/dollars would have been saved if Bush wasn't so intent on "putting him in his place"

 

[Fitswimmer]

this isn't new news. I read about this before we even invaded Iraq, so I suspect the goverment was aware that he was trying to create an illusion.

Then again, I also read that Saddam offered to step down and go into exile before we attacked. Think about how many lives/dollars would have been saved if Bush wasn't so intent on "putting him in his place"

Yeah, but George Soros probably knew someone that knew someone who worked at the place who printed that Saddam offered to step down, so there's no way that could be credible....

I'll be watching with interest on Sunday, and I'll wait until I've seen the entire show to comment.