PDA

View Full Version : debka: CIA Adviser Kay Amasses Evidence of Saddam’s WMD


zimv20
Aug 2, 2003, 05:44 PM
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=533

details of the forthcoming bush/blair PR campaign. article claims there is a good amount of documentation evidence of WMD in iraq.

also notable is the claim that bio materials were moved to syria. i'm guessing there will be a move by bush (if not blair) to continue military action there.

Backtothemac
Aug 2, 2003, 08:12 PM
Originally posted by zimv20
http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=533

details of the forthcoming bush/blair PR campaign. article claims there is a good amount of documentation evidence of WMD in iraq.

also notable is the claim that bio materials were moved to syria. i'm guessing there will be a move by bush (if not blair) to continue military action there.

Wow, great article. Question. If that all turns out to be true, then what do you think we should do about it?

pseudobrit
Aug 2, 2003, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Wow, great article. Question. If that all turns out to be true, then what do you think we should do about it?

If what turns out to be true?

That the weapons are really in Syria or that the Bush administration will say they're in Syria and invade?

I think the latter has a better chance of actually happening. Where O where will the WMD end up?

Backtothemac
Aug 2, 2003, 11:20 PM
Originally posted by pseudobrit
If what turns out to be true?

That the weapons are really in Syria or that the Bush administration will say they're in Syria and invade?

I think the latter has a better chance of actually happening. Where O where will the WMD end up?

If they are in Syria, and they proof of it.

pseudobrit
Aug 2, 2003, 11:26 PM
Don't you think it would be a rather... convenient excuse?

It would kill 2 birds with one stone. It would provide a temporary answer for the world to the WMD question and would scratch the neocon "we hate Syria" itch too.

IJ Reilly
Aug 3, 2003, 12:44 AM
I don't see what's new here. The WMD programs were never in serious dispute, and the rumors about Syria have been around for months. This is reputed to be a "hot news" site, but it seems like they're mainly rehashing, and sprinkling in a few conspiracy theories for good measure.

Sayhey
Aug 3, 2003, 02:29 AM
Here's a rhetorical question, if we assume that the report is true and bioweapons are in Syria, a major assumption I know, what gives the US the right to become the world's policeman on this issue? In Iraq, many have very different opinions as the "rightness" of that move, but at least there was a long history of UN Security Council resolutions and the agreements ending the first Gulf War. What would give the US the right to go into Syria whatever they might have, if it is not a direct threat to the US. Is it just that we are the "good" guys and we get to make the decisions for everyone else? I haven't looked up yet to see if Syria is a signator to any treaty that forbids such weapons, but even if they are shouldn't this be handled by international agencies?

This all presumes that WMDs are the issue, of course. If the question is the every expanding zone of US control any old excuse will do.

zimv20
Aug 3, 2003, 03:08 AM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Wow, great article. Question. If that all turns out to be true, then what do you think we should do about it?

it is indeed an "if," as debka aims to be the first to report something (and as IJR points out, the syria aspect isn't new, and for me the article is more about the method and timing of the PR portion).

that said, debka has been accurate before, so it's certainly worth thinking about.

what if some WMD were moved to syria? first, the biggest question for me would be, "is this sanctioned by the syrian gov't?" if not, then i'd want to see how the syrian gov't responds. after that, i'd consider the nature of what was allegedly moved and the nature of the threat posed to the US. the devil is in the details.

i would not automatically assume a US or US-led invasion is the right thing. i'm not one to jump at the spectre of the W-M-D letters -- i want hard info wrt material substance, possession and potential threat.

IJ Reilly
Aug 3, 2003, 10:48 AM
If Saddam moved WMD stockpiles into Syria during the run-up to the war, and it can be proven, this may read as at least a partial vindication of the Bush administration's case. On the other side of the coin will be the questions about whether it was wiser to contain the WMD programs in Iraq under sanctions and inspections until the larger Saddam question could be settled internationally, or to allow bioweapons, etc. to effectively proliferate into a neighboring country by stirring up the Saddam hornet's nest. So while such a discovery would potentially solve a political problem for both Bush and Blair, it would raise an entirely new problems and questions about the Bush doctrine and where it leads.