December 06, 2012

Saddam's WMD's in Syria?

Timothy Birdnow

Syria is threatening to use chemical weapons on her own people, and intellignce agencies across the region are taking the threat seriously. Why?

Well, for starters, Iraq's chemical weapons went somewhere prior to the U.S. invasion. We may be facing Saddam's old arsenal.

From Investor's Business Daily:

"The irony here is that the chemical weapons stockpile of Syrian thug Assad may in large part be the legacy of weapons moved from Hussein's Iraq into Syria before Operation Iraqi Freedom.

If so, this may be the reason not much was found in the way of WMD by victorious U.S. forces in 2003.

In 2006, former Iraqi general Georges Sada, second in command of the Iraqi Air Force who served under Saddam Hussein before he defected, wrote a comprehensive book, "Saddam's Secrets."

It details how the Iraqi Revolutionary Guard moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria in advance of the U.S.-led action to eliminate Hussein's WMD threat.

As Sada told the New York Sun, two Iraqi Airways Boeings were converted to cargo planes by removing the seats, and special Republican Guard units loaded the planes with chemical weapons materials.
mp3Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast

There were 56 flights disguised as a relief effort after a 2002 Syrian dam collapse.

There were also truck convoys into Syria. Sada's comments came more than a month after Israel's top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Yaalon, told the Sun that Saddam "transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria."

Both Israeli and U.S. intelligence observed large truck convoys leaving Iraq and entering Syria in the weeks and months before Operation Iraqi Freedom, John Shaw, former deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, told a private conference of former weapons inspectors and intelligence experts held in Arlington, Va., in 2006.

According to Shaw, ex-Russian intelligence chief Yevgeni Primakov, a KGB general with long-standing ties to Saddam, went to Iraq in December 2002 and stayed until just before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

Anticipating the invasion, his job was to supervise the removal of such weapons and erase as much evidence of Russian involvement as possible"

End excerpt.

And Russian Spetsnast (special forces) moved into Lebanon's Bekka Valley shortly after the U.S. invasion of Iraq with over 100 technical people, ostensibly to work on a bridge. I've got a bridge to sell anyone who believes THAT!

The Russians are and were Syria's ally, and they have been engaged from the very beginning.

What nobody has ever been able to do is show where and how Saddam destroyed his chemical weapons. This isn't like burning grass clippings; it takes a lab, and special equipment. We failed to find WMD's in Iraq, but also failed to find the leftovers from their destruction. And we know they had those weapons; they used them on the Kurds, after all.

Oh, there are people who think this is nonsense. See this article in Wired.

But this only makes sense if one assumes Iraq and the Middle East are cozy little suburban communities. That is always a problem for liberals; they cannot see the differences in thinking between ourselves and other people.

Kris Alexander, the author, makes the following arguments:

1."First: Think about it for a second. Strategically and militarily, it made no sense for Saddam to transfer his weapons of mass destruction to Syria. Saddam worked on acquiring WMD for a reason: to stave off an invasion and hold on to power" End quote.

Nonsense; Saddam knew that using those weapons would guarantee a nasty end for himself. He was counting on the American public and particularly the American Left to pull his cookies from the fire. He (as so many in the Middle East do) understood the political uproar that those weapons would cause. Had he used them it would have accomplished nothing tangible and would have spelled his end. His plan was to use guerilla warfare to drive the invaders out and he tried to hide until that was accomplished. He thought he would return, tell the world he was wronged (when the WMD's failed to appear) and demand restitution from America. It would have been stupid to do anything else.

Oh, and Alexander makes this claim;

"Just listen to a defeated Saddam for a second. In a post-invasion interview, Saddam admitted that he had been bluffing about his WMD. This is actually case-closed for the conspiracy theories about his weapons transfers."

What was he going to do? He was trying to save his own skin. Had he admitted to hiding the weapons he was giving up his last hole card. He never expected to be executed in the way he was by Shiite Muslims; he was playing for America to keep him alive so they could learn more.

2."But for a moment, let’s suppose that Saddam circumvented the most intrusive sanction regime the world has ever known and rebuilt his WMD programs after inspectors (and Israeli jets) destroyed them. His reasoning would have been deterrence — as Thomas Schelling put it, Saddam would have given his enemies a "threat that leaves something to chance.” That’s why the Assad regime threatens on and off to use WMD: It keeps the foreign hordes at bay. So why, with U.S. massing forces on his border, would Saddam give up the one thing he had to raise the cost of invading to the Americans?" End excerpt.

Again, how and where were they destroyed? You might as well say fairies came and carried them to never-never land.

These weapons were deterence for weaker countries; they could never threaten the U.S. military in any credible way. Saddam knew it - and he gambled he could win politically what he could not win militarily. This really isn't that complicated.

3."Third, the Iraqi Ba’athists and Syrian Ba’athists are far from allies. Syria’s Allawites are minority Shiites and proxies to Iraq’s arch-enemy Iran. They fought on the allied side against Iraq during Desert Storm. Why would Saddam turn over his deadliest weapons Iran’s best friend in the region? Remember: Saddam says he made his WMD threats to cower the Iranians."

Not exactly; they are both Baathists, and the Russians were there to guarantee at least a chance of getting these things back. One must remember the Russians were the real villains in all of this. And what was Saddam to do? He was not going to put his neck in the noose.

4."Fourth, from a U.S. military perspective, the transfer would have been impossible to hide. I worked at U.S. Central Command’s Mideast headquarters before, during, and after the invasion, which gave me a good understanding of what was going on at the time. The region was blanketed by U.S. military assets. Operation Enduring Freedom was in full swing in Afghanistan, and Operations Northern and Southern Watch were still in place over Iraq. If something moved — like, say a convoy of Winnebagos of Death heading for Syria — it could be detected and killed" End excerpt.

Read the IBD excerpt; there were all sorts of things moving into Syria at this time and we did nothing. This is the weakest argument yet.

5."Do you think anyone in the administration or the military would have turned down the chance to justify the war before it started? Further, does anyone honestly think that if the Bush administration had good evidence that the material was somehow making its way into Syria, it wouldn’t have acted? Defense Secretary Rumsfeld was threatening Assad almost as soon as U.S. troops reached Baghdad."

Yes. We were tiptoeing around the Russians. What were the Bush people going to do? Start WWIII?

As usual, Liberals live in an alternate reality, one which is malleable to their wishes. The hard fact is that there is every reason to believe Saddam had those weapons (every national security agency in the world said he did) and we have no evidence he disposed of them. But too many nations in the U.N. had vested interests in Iraq - the Russians, the French, and a host of others were making huge amounts of money off the Iraqis. Koffi Anon's own son made a fortune off the Oil for Food program. It was a cash cow - and nobody wanted to see it end. Usually liberals hate it when people make money, but they seem to overlook what transpired in Iraq.

Kris Alexander seems to believe it was purely a war between America and Iraq, and does not understand the greater geo-political ramifications.

And so now we may be facing the lost weapons in Syria.

But the Left will never, ever admit they were there.

Not facing reality is what children and the mentally ill do. Liberals need to grow up - or take some meds.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:17 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1465 words, total size 9 kb.

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
24kb generated in CPU 0.01, elapsed 0.0134 seconds.
31 queries taking 0.0064 seconds, 153 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.