Iraq war just afterall? - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

metallicat · 01-28-2006, 05:13 PM

http://www.nysun.com/article/26514

The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.

***

Interesting. This is one guy who is likely to know the truth. Or is he a Bush plant trying to spread lies?

Incinerator · 01-28-2006, 05:14 PM

With a first name like Georges I'd suspect the latter

La Flames Fan · 01-28-2006, 05:20 PM

Not surprising to hear about this especially from the New York Sun (Does anyone actually read this?) which a heavily tilted-right newspaper. If this was a bombshell we'd at least see it somewhere, even Fox News!

I don't give much credence to the story.

metallicat · 01-28-2006, 05:21 PM

Well it's just a news article, but Sada has written a book on this.

http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASI...497329-9459228

RougeUnderoos · 01-28-2006, 05:33 PM

Even if this is true, which it might not be, it's sounds like a pretty pathetic operation and certainly nothing like the operation that was sold to justify the war.

It is extremely difficult to load a vast underground tunnel complex into a passenger plane, even if you do take the seats out.

Incinerator · 01-28-2006, 05:35 PM

I agree, looks like this guy just want to sell a few books to me.

octothorp · 01-28-2006, 05:37 PM

People say a lot of things when they're trying to sell books. Highly suspect, given that he himself does not claim that he knew at the time that weapons were being transported, but merely attributes it to a couple friends of his, who's names he won't divludge.

Mike F · 01-28-2006, 05:38 PM

So all he wants is a peaceful life, and he greatly thanks the Americans but couldn't tell this to them before, and he's not a publicity hound. . . . but he's willing to now talk about this openly to a newspaper just as his book is being released

Oh, and the US just happened to miss all of Iraq's WMDs being flown out of the country to Syria on 54 different flights by two pilots.

Shawnski · 01-28-2006, 05:41 PM

I certainly don't want to open this debate, but I will say, this topic is essentially what got me joining message boards. The CBC one is where I popped my cherry. At first, I think my post was "Oil, oil, oil!!", but after I researched quite a while, it became evident to me that in all likelihood after Gulf 1 that Saddam got nervous and indeed moved anything of consequence elsewhere. Not just Syria either.

Again, not here to open up that can of worms, just noting how it impacted my perspective and interaction within cyberspace.

Flame On · 01-28-2006, 06:00 PM

Hasn't the administration admited there was bad intelligence though? Whether you agree with the war or not, and whether you can let Bush and co. off or not for the bad intelligence, seems to me they admitted thats what they were dealing with.
It would almost make them look even more foolish now if this were true. Um we said there were lots of bad weapons and there wasn't and we said there was none. Now we're going back to there was lots.

metallicat · 01-28-2006, 06:07 PM

I'd say you have you admit it was bad intelligence if they can't find anything they were supposed to. They would look like complete wingnuts if they kept insisting that there were in fact WMDs in Iraq.

transplant99 · 01-28-2006, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnski

I certainly don't want to open this debate, but I will say, this topic is essentially what got me joining message boards. The CBC one is where I popped my cherry. At first, I think my post was "Oil, oil, oil!!", but after I researched quite a while, it became evident to me that in all likelihood after Gulf 1 that Saddam got nervous and indeed moved anything of consequence elsewhere. Not just Syria either.

Again, not here to open up that can of worms, just noting how it impacted my perspective and interaction within cyberspace.

Agreed...not here to perpetuate an endless cycle of debate.

But one thing about this has always bothered me and never been answered.

OK...the US didnt find WMD when they finally went in in March of 03.

However, we do know that Iraq DID in fact have them at one time because he used them....once cleary documented, and accused of others.

Being that he used them at least once, and with great success in his warped mind, what would of ever suggested he quit the program of developing them? Was it the 4 years that he had UN inspectors kicked out of the country so he couldnt be caught with them? Or did he really succumb to international pressure, dump them and the program, and THEN stand up to the US without anything to back himself up?

Just trying to apply a bit of common sense to the whole thing that doesn't ad up.....at all.

The easiest, and likely IMO, answer is that he did send what he had out of the country and that is when he invited the UN inspectors back in. Likely destinations have to include Syria....don't they?

Daradon · 01-28-2006, 06:30 PM

They played a bit of this guys interview on the radio the other day. Even in his story he was uhmming and errring a lot. Dunno, here could be many many reason why he'd say this or be put up to this. When there is hard evidence, and not just one man telling a story, I'll be inclined to believe it.

Daradon · 01-28-2006, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by transplant99

But one thing about this has always bothered me and never been answered.

Being that he used them at least once, and with great success in his warped mind, what would of ever suggested he quit the program of developing them? Was it the 4 years that he had UN inspectors kicked out of the country so he couldnt be caught with them? Or did he really succumb to international pressure, dump them and the program, and THEN stand up to the US without anything to back himself up?

I had always kind of been of the opinion that he didn't have enough money to run a successful program. Maybe he had a little here and there, but nothing like he did before Gulf 1.

The fact that he stood up to the US with or without them really doesn't make a difference to me. He didn't use them anyway. So obviously he was planning on standing up to the US either way.

Shawnski · 01-28-2006, 06:40 PM

Let's put it this way....

If the cops come knocking at your door (Gulf War 1) and show they are very focused on you, but at the time didn't have a search warrant, would you not get rid of any pot you had hiding when you had a chance?

RougeUnderoos · 01-28-2006, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by transplant99

Agreed...not here to perpetuate an endless cycle of debate.

But one thing about this has always bothered me and never been answered.

OK...the US didnt find WMD when they finally went in in March of 03.

However, we do know that Iraq DID in fact have them at one time because he used them....once cleary documented, and accused of others.

Being that he used them at least once, and with great success in his warped mind, what would of ever suggested he quit the program of developing them? Was it the 4 years that he had UN inspectors kicked out of the country so he couldnt be caught with them? Or did he really succumb to international pressure, dump them and the program, and THEN stand up to the US without anything to back himself up?

Just trying to apply a bit of common sense to the whole thing that doesn't ad up.....at all.

The easiest, and likely IMO, answer is that he did send what he had out of the country and that is when he invited the UN inspectors back in. Likely destinations have to include Syria....don't they?

The whole place got absolutely creamed in 1991 and then had 12 years of harsh sanctions before the 2003 invasion. They didn't have the money, ability, equipment or suppliers (such as the US) to get back to where they were.

metallicat · 01-28-2006, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daradon

They played a bit of this guys interview on the radio the other day. Even in his story he was uhmming and errring a lot. Dunno, here could be many many reason why he'd say this or be put up to this. When there is hard evidence, and not just one man telling a story, I'll be inclined to believe it.

I think you would be uhmming and erring if you were doing an interview in some foreign language as well.

Shawnski · 01-28-2006, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The whole place got absolutely creamed in 1991 and then had 12 years of harsh sanctions before the 2003 invasion. They didn't have the money, ability, equipment or suppliers (such as the US) to get back to where they were.

The "whole place" did not get creamed in 1991. And in the subsequent years, the "people" had harsh sanctions, not necessarily the government. Dig deeper, Rouge.

transplant99 · 01-28-2006, 08:17 PM

Quote:

They didn't have the money, ability, equipment or suppliers (such as the US) to get back to where they were.

Didn't have money???

What? He has over 20 BILLION US dollars in frozen accounts right now...and thats the ones they know of.

Didnt have suppliers? Russia ring a bell?

Quote:

The whole place got absolutely creamed in 1991 and then had 12 years of harsh sanctions before the 2003 invasion.

No..the WHOLE place didnt get "creamed"...selective targets did. Bagdahd was never even reached by ground forces. Unless a vast part of the desert is considered somewhat important...this is patently not true.

Sanctions? You mean the ones that were ignored the entire time from 91 to 03? the same sanctions that resulted in the last one being issued that said they had to start honoring the earlier ones INCLUDING allowing inspectors in after they were KICKED OUT in 98?

Yeah...hang your hat on that one Rouge. You are smarter than that...the guy was a desperate despot that would of done ANYTHING to stay in charge of things....including trying to show the world he was in charge by booting the one group of guys that truly threatened his existance while he moved/destroyed the very evidence they needed to allow a complete and utter destruction of him and his ruling party.

RougeUnderoos · 01-28-2006, 09:07 PM

Geez Louise this is tough. What'll it take for you guys to believe they were wrong? I mean really, if George and Dick admitting they made a mistake and the CIA admitting that there were failures and saying, and I quote, "we were almost all wrong" isn't enough then what will it take?

They were wrong. They've admitted it. They have said they were wrong. How much more obvious can it be? They have admitted to being wrong and what you are now saying is "no, they weren't wrong". I mean come on

You can cook up all the crazy conspiracies and believe whatever a former high-ranking member of Saddam's regime has to say on the matter but the Bush administration and the CIA have said that they had made mistakes and they were wrong about Iraq's weapons and capabilities. It's ****ing black and white.

THEY WERE WRONG AND THEY HAVE ADMITTED THEY WERE WRONG.