No memory loss here. My entire argument against the existence of WMD
before the war was based on the information from the inspectors.
Almost unanimously, the inspectors felt that there were no WMD. And
they were right. But it was their job to make sure.

They knew that the WMD he had previously didn't have a shelf-life, and
they knew when Ritter was pulled out that he didn't have facilities to
manufacture more, and while they weren't doing inspections for 10
years, they did watch what he was bringing into the country and they
were pretty certain he didn't have new materials. So the evidence was
against the existence.

But yes, Saddam was playing hinky with the inspectors because he
didn't have the records to account for the materials he didn't have.
So everyone was suspicious. But while the administration was saying he
had the WMD, the inspectors were saying he very likely didn't. And
Bush, if you recall, was rather upset about it and that's when the
defamation of the inspectors began.

-Kevin

On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 12:15:07 -0500, Andy Ousterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since everyone seems to be suffering from memory loss, remember that everyone,
> including Blix, thought that he had them and that he was playing with Blix,
> preventing him from doing his job until he thought that we would invade, then
> he'd provide a little access.  He could have, at any time, said what he did
> with all of the missing WMD material that Blix thought that he had.
>
> So I take it you condone breaking the law?
>
>
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 12:07 PM
>   To: CF-Community
>   Subject: Re: CBC News: Bush rushed into Iraq invasion: Clinton
>
>   Not complying with the requirements of the UN is a technical foul, but
>   not the same as having WMD.
>
>   -Kevin
>
>   On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:22:04 -0500, Andy Ousterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>   > Yes, it makes sense that HE would say it, but what he says does not make
> any
>   > sense on its own merits.  Especially since Blix said that they
> specifically
>   > were not complying with the requirements as stated by the United Nations.
>   >
>   > Andy
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]

Reply via email to