Critics are continuously demanding to know where the Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMDs) are ... and, now the UK Parliament and the US Congress are both opening investigations. This is significant because in both countries the leaders, Blair and Bush, represent the majority party. What is being ignored, and I trust will become an equal part of these investigations, are some salient facts that should moderate any concerns:
First, Saddam Hussein likely wanted to stay in power. If there are/were no WMDs in his country, then all he had to do was declare those items that he ignored in his formal declaration to the UN by: a.) Listing them, b.) providing proof of their disposal, c.) inviting immediate and open and unfettered inspections, c.) allow any and all Iraqi scientists and their families to leave Iraq for open and unfettered interviews ... because it would all have proven him innocent, for he would have nothing to worry about. Instead, he stalled and delayed and was not fully cooperative ... this is a telling issue being ignored.
Last September, when the UN voted resolution 1441, it did so unanimously … why? … because they all knew that Saddam Hussein was not honest, and was harboring WMDs, and they understood the impact of the removal of UN Inspectors years earlier. This was not taken lightly, or with little evidence ... for the facts were overwhelming, such that even Russia, France and Germany were on board.
Second, as condition of the ceasefire from the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein promised not to developed, possess, or attempt to obtain any WMDs, and further agreed to inspections, removal and destruction of all WMDs, and to declare everything he had … he stalled, whined, wiggled, and resisted for 12 long years … he resisted to the bitter end with continuous material breaches.
What has been found to date? Critics have yet to define what will satisfy them as to what constitutes WMDs. Is it a stockpile a mile high of nuclear weapons armed and ready to drop on the rest of the world? Or perhaps vats of chemical sludge the size of the Persian Gulf to convince them that WMDs are there or being worked on? The following describes what has been found in just three short months … but ... first consider this: The United Kingdom is about 94,217 sq miles in size, whereas Iraq is 171,599 sq miles, or put another way almost twice the size of the UK … and area larger than California … a sizeable country wherein caches of weapons could be almost anywhere. Yet, here is what we have to date:
1. The illegal drone was found that can both travel far outside Iraq, but is large enough to carry a significant payload of weapons ... this drone all by itself is enough to prove material breech, thus justifying military action.
2. They did find some long-range missiles that can travel far outside Iraq and carry significant ordinance payload. These were not declared nor discovered until the UK and US military arrived.
3. More? Yes, they found significant supplies of Serrin gas . Why this is being ignored by critics is beyond me. The is one of the undeclared WMDs that George Bush and Tony Blair were speaking about, yet somehow critics simply dismiss this find.
4. More? Yes, they found a highly radioactive site. This is significant because you cannot have this unless you conduct processing of weapons grade materials. The weapons and unprocessed materials are usually low level when measured for radiation, and therefore, will not leave high-level readings behind. However, the high levels prove that processing was taking place and that there are fissionable by-products around somewhere. The weapons and by-products were not there, and for good reason, as Saddam is smart enough to make sure they were moved and hidden. But, he could not hide the radioactive evidence. Funny how Cesium-137 turns up in Thailand during this time ... just a coincidence I guess. Must be the Russians as the media said. Does anyone here know how you get Cesium-137? And how this is tied to weapons processing? I worked with Cesium-137 at Hanford where decades earlier the US built an atomic bomb to drop on Japan ... so, I have some familiarity with this. The Cesium tanks are the by-products of the US nuclear program.
5. More? Yes, because the mobile weapons labs found are significant . They may not have been put into use, accounting for no readings of chemical or biological materials ... but their existence is highly illegal under the UN resolutions, and is further significant material breech ... the claim that these mobile labs were nothing more than weather balloon helium devices is absurd and insulting to anyone's intelligence ...
6. More? Yes, the Al Qaeda manuals, Al Qaeda training camps, and airplane shell remains used for mock hijackings … are all evidence that Iraq was at least working with Al Qaeda, or at least hosting their operations there ... making them a terrorist support state ... making them a declared target of the USA and UK. It could also be a place where they trained for 9-11 ... but that is not proven, or necessarily provable unless they find additional documentation.
7. More? Yes, the documents found that tie together named members of the French government in tipping off Iraqi officials of UN Unmovic and UNScom Inspectors prior to their arrival at inspection sites. Why on God's green earth would the French do this unless there was something to help Saddam Hussein hide? And the French motives were what? Pure? Or were they the ones really worrying about oil contracts?
8. Finally, last week, the US and UK got a break when one of Saddam’s cronies confessed that he had some WMD materials on his private property. What did they recover? They found essential parts and equipment used in building nuclear bombs … clearly materials that were outlawed to them … this is an important find because now we understand that Saddam was hiding materials and equipment in private facilities, rather than in nice neatly marker building with the letters “WMDs” painting for the European and American media to focus their cameras on.
What really counts? The scope of the war was to remove Saddam's government and get the weapons ... while searching for weapons and ancillary evidence, the UK and US forces found many mass graves with tens of thousands of murdered Iraqis, Iranians, Kurds, men, women, and children. They found a prison full of young Iraqi boys. They found people with their tongues cut out, tortured in gruesome fashion, etc. ALL of this item is enough justification that critics should just let it go ... but their emotional convictions that Bush and Blair are evil just won't allow them to see the big picture ...
While the UN Security Council voted unanimously for Res. 1441 which allowed for military intervention ... it was not needed, as the first war with Iraq was not officially over ... it was a cease-fire under certain conditions which were not being met by Hussein ... so the resumption of hostilities was justified. However, Bush and Blair erred in trying to get an additional UN vote to agree on invasion ... however, post Gulf War the UN voted once again in a 14-0 vote with Syria abstaining to agree that Bush and Blair did the right thing ... a significant point that critics just ignore.
Nonetheless, the war was well justified, with comparatively few deaths. And now the USA is rebuilding Iraq ... they now have electricity in greater supply and more frequent than when Saddam was there ... and other services are being restored and improved ...
The Americans and British are being killed everyday as they try to do good and help ... critics sit on the sidelines belly-aching and are not lifting a finger to help ... all the while radical Shiites are coming in from Iran to whip up anti-US/UK sentiments ... yet, the Americans and Brits keep doing good by providing food, supplies for schools, medical help, etc.
Critics wail about the Iraqi museum artifacts being stolen, as though this outweighed life and limb to protect ... yet, these were already taken by insiders before the military arrived ... and … oddly enough, a soldier was killed today who was assigned to protect the Museum … fulfilling a request by critics … his life was expended to protect a few historical artifacts … yes, oil was protected as well … to save the environment and maintain this important reserve to help restore the Iraqi economy.
All in all, the critics appear to be whiny babies who cannot see the good beyond any less serious mistakes . They cannot accept the clear evidence of material breeches beyond their unspecified demands of what constitutes a WMD. Worst of all, they cannot see the faces of this imprisoned children, whose faces cried out for help ... and that whatever the initial reasons for the intervention into Iraq ... it was the children who really counted in all this ... and that is a shame for the critics to deal with … because their seething hatred of Blair and Bush is so great, that they just ignore the heavy evidence … because to do otherwise would mean to admit that maybe Blair and Bush did the right thing. - Jim W.