Iraqis must fix Iraq, Powell tells crowd in Indy

[Kilo]

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070313/LOCAL18/703130375/-1/ZONES04


March 13, 2007

http://www.sikhtimes.com/colin_powell_at_the_un_feb_5_2003.jpg

Iraqis must fix Iraq, Powell tells crowd in Indy
Former secretary also says 'global warming is a fact' and U.S. is 'still a trusted nation'

By Will Higgins
will.higgins@indystar.com

American troops can't fix Iraq -- they can only keep a lid on the civil war there.
So said Colin Powell in a speech Monday night. "With the (U.S. troop) surge, we have a heavier lid," he said, "but the Iraqis have to come together. What's needed is an Iraqi strategy."
If the Iraqis "don't start coming together by the end of the year," Powell said, "another (U.S.) course is needed."
Powell was the speaker at the annual Block Forum, a lecture series held annually at the Indianapolis Hebrew Congregation.
His speech was wide-ranging, mentioning the war in Iraq, education and the environment. Powell, a month shy of his 70th birthday and two years retired from his post as U.S. secretary of state, is a lecture-circuit regular.
He decried the state of K-12 education in the United States; he proclaimed that "global warming is a fact!" Mostly, though, he was upbeat.
He pointed out that when he joined the Army, in 1958, the world faced nuclear annihilation, and now it doesn't. The nascent nuclear threats in North Korea and Iran "will be solved diplomatically," he said.
Fifty years ago, international relations were all about militarism, he said, but now economics is king. "It's all: 'How do we create jobs?' 'How do we attract investment?' "
He said the U.S. is "still a trusted nation," and "as long as we believe in ourselves, the rest of the world will believe in us."
Greeted with a standing ovation by a packed house of more than 1,000, Powell was relaxed and personable.
He announced to the audience his fourth grandchild had been born earlier in the day. He confided to them that one of the first things he did after leaving the Cabinet was to buy a Corvette.
He got belly laughs rhapsodizing about how he missed having his own Boeing 757 airplane, which comes with being secretary of state, "and that long, red carpet they'd roll out for me, and a band that would strike up when I came down the steps -- it was cool."
A decade ago, Powell was considered a front-runner for the presidency. But he held back, later disclosing he had little interest in politics.
The Block Forum lecture series was established in 1983 with money left to the Indianapolis Hebrew Congregation by Edward Block, whose family once owned the large, Indianapolis-based department store chain that bore their name.

[Laworkerbee]

Good to see he is doing well but damn if I don't want hiim to run for president of the United States.

He is the man I most respect in politics today

[Firetxmi]

Looks to me like the man speaks the truth!

[ElHombre]

If the Iraqis "don't start coming together by the end of the year," Powell said, "another (U.S.) course is needed."

I'm tired of all these 'just another X amount of time' statements*. What do they think is going to happen that hasn't in the last 3-4 years? It's time to crap or get off the pot. The only thing that's going to change by the end of the year is the casualty count.

*Columnist Tom Friedman used the phrase 'The next six months are critical in Iraq' for so many years that the term 'Friedman Unit' (or F.U.) was coined as a sarcastic jibe.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Looks to me like the man speaks the truth!

Isn't this the SAME guy in 2003 that went before the UN and argued for us to invade Iraq in the first place?

Not to bash the man, I just wanted to point out something very intersting.

Powell is right about the Iraqis coming together....but, what will bring them together? Could it be more reconstruction when we get the security down pat? Breaking the country apart into 3 seperate states? Or, will it be us up and running out of the country like some people really want.

Well, here is my view...if we keep the security on the right track, then we might just be able to begin rebuilding what we destroyed. Now, that might turn some heads. Splitting the country into 3 states? A really bad idea. The 3 different sections of Iraq do not get along now and we are fighting them to keep them from killing eachother...what makes people think that as 3 seperate states they will ever get along then? You can bet, we will be right back there smack dab in the middle fighting 3 seperate countries like we are doing now 25 years from now.

Iraq has no easy fixes. The culture is complex, the insurgency is pretty potent, and our own politicians keep shooting us in the foot every chance they get.

[Roaming East]

Hard to be objective when the Intelligence your basing your decisions on is either fraudulent or biased. Given what the CIA was feeding him and the rest of the world, invasion seemed like a rationale concept.

[Laworkerbee]

Well, here is my view...if we keep the security on the right track, then we might just be able to begin rebuilding what we destroyed. Now, that might turn some heads. Splitting the country into 3 states? A really bad idea. The 3 different sections of Iraq do not get along now and we are fighting them to keep them from killing eachother...what makes people think that as 3 seperate states they will ever get along then? You can bet, we will be right back there smack dab in the middle fighting 3 seperate countries like we are doing now 25 years from now.

Iraq was successfully ruled as three seperate states by the Ottoman empire for over 700 years or so up until the league of nations mandate in 1932 creating Iraq and placing it under British control forcing the Shia, Sunni, Kurds, and the rest of the mish mash to live together.

[9mmRifle]

at least he tries to be honest unlike some of the other frauds in the whitehouse

[Kilo]

Hard to be objective when the Intelligence your basing your decisions on is either fraudulent or biased. Given what the CIA was feeding him and the rest of the world, invasion seemed like a rationale concept.

escuse me !?


link: http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,462782,00.html


Tyler Drumheller, 54, had a 25- year career working for the CIA. In 2001, he was promoted to become the American intelligence agency's chief of European operations. Drumheller, who retired in 2005, recently published his memoir, "On the Brink," in the United States.

SPIEGEL: But it was your agency that was coming up with all the wrong information concerning Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction. To what degree is the intelligence community responsible for the disaster?
Drumheller: The agency is not blameless and no president on my watch has had a spotless record when it comes to the CIA. But never before have I seen the manipulation of intelligence that has played out since Bush took office. As chief of Europe I had a front-row seat from which to observe the unprecedented drive for intelligence justifying the Iraq war.
SPIEGEL: One of the crucial bits of information the Bush administration used to justify the invasion was the supposed existence of mobile biological weapons laboratories. That came from a German BND source who was given the code-name "Curveball (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,395676,00.html)." An offical investigation in the United States concluded that of all of the false statements that were made, this was the most damaging of all.
Drumheller: I think it is, it was a centerpiece.Curveball was an Iraqi who claimed to be an engineer working on the biological weapons program. When he became an asylum-seeker in Germany, the BND questioned him and produced a large number of reports that were passed here through the Defense Intelligence Agency. Curveball was a sort of clever fellow who carried on about his story and kept everybody pretty well convinced for a long time.
SPIEGEL: There are more than a few critics in Washington who claim that the Germans, because of Curveball, bear a large part of the repsonsibility for the intelligence mess.
Drumheller: There was no effort by the Germans to influence anybody from the beginning. Very senior officials in the BND expressed their doubts, that there may be problems with this guy. They were very professional. I know that there are people at the CIA who think the Germans could have set stronger caveats. But nobody says: "Here's a great intel report, but we don't believe it." There were also questions inside the CIA's analytical section, but as it went forward, this information was seized without caveats. The administration wanted to make the case for war with Iraq. They needed a tangible thing, they needed the German stuff. They couldn't go to war based just on the fact that they wanted to change the Middle East. They needed to have something threatening to which they were reacting.
SPIEGEL: The German government was convinced that "Curveball" would not be used in the now famous presentation that then US Secretary of State Colin Powell gave in 2003 before the United Nations Security Council.

Drumheller: I had assured my German friends that it wouldn't be in the speech. I really thought that I had put it to bed. I had warned the CIA deputy John McLaughlin that this case could be fabricated. The night before the speech, then CIA director George Tenet called me at home. I said: "Hey Boss, be careful with that German report. It's supposed to be taken out. There are a lot of problems with that." He said: "Yeah, yeah. Right. Dont worry about that."

SPIEGEL: But it turned out to be the centerpiece in Powell's presentation -- and nobody had told him about the doubts.
Drumheller: I turned on the TV in my office, and there it was. So the first thing I thought, having worked in the government all my life, was that we probably gave Powell the wrong speech. We checked our files and found out that they had just ignored it.
SPIEGEL: So the White House just ignored the fact that the whole story might have been untrue?
Drumheller: The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy. Right before the war, I said to a very senior CIA officer: "You guys must have something else," because you always think it's the CIA. "There is some secret thing I don`t know." He said: "No. But when we get to Baghdad, we are going to find warehouses full of stuff. Nobody is going to remember all of this."
SPIEGEL: After the war, the CIA was finally able to talk to "Curveball" -- something the BND had never allowed before. What was the result?
Drumheller: In March 2004, a fluent German-speaking officer, one of my best guys, who had a scientific background went to Germany and worked for about two weeks. Finally, at the end of it, Curveball just sort of sat back and said: "I don't have anything more to say." But he never admitted. People here always ask, was he polygraphed? Well, lie detector tests aren't used very much in Germany.
SPIEGEL: Do you think it would have make a difference if the Germans had allowed you to question Curveball earlier?
Drumheller: If they had allowed us to question him the way we did in March of 2004, it would have. Maybe the whole story would have turned out in a different way.
SPIEGEL: In your book, you mention a very high-ranking source who told the CIA before the war that Iraq had no large active WMD program. It has been reported that the source was Saddam Hussein's foreign minister, Naji Sabri.
Drumheller: I'm not allowed to say who that was. In the beginning, the administration was very excited that we had a high-level penetration, and the president was informed. I don't think anybody else had a source in Saddam's cabinet. He told us that Iraq had no biological weapons, just the research. Everything else had been destroyed after the first Gulf War. But after a while we didn't get any questions back. Finally the administration came and said that they were really not interested in what he had to say. They were interested in getting him to defect. In the end we did get permission to get back to the source, and that came from Tenet. I think without checking with the White House, he just said: "Okay. Go ahead and see what you can do."
SPIEGEL: So what happened?
Drumheller: There were a lot of ironies throughout this whole story. We went on a sort of worldwide chase after this fellow, and in the end, he was in one place, and our officer was in another country asking for permission to travel. I called up people who were controlling operations, and they said: "Don't worry about it. It's too late now. The war is on. The next time you see this guy, it will be at a war crimes tribunal."
SPIEGEL: Should you have pressed harder?
Drumheller: We made mistakes. And it may suit the White House to have people believe in a black and white version of reality -- that it could have avoided the Iraq war if the CIA had only given it a true picture of Saddam's armaments. But the truth is that the White House believed what it wanted to believe. I have done very little in my life except go to school and work for the CIA. Intellectually I think I did everything I could. Emotionally you always think you should have something more.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

Iraq was successfully ruled as three seperate states by the Ottoman empire for over 700 years or so up until the league of nations mandate in 1932 creating Iraq and placing it under British control forcing the Shia, Sunni, Kurds, and the rest of the mish mash to live together.

History dictates that might be the thing to do, but it also might be a very dangerous idea. In Iraq today, you have 3 main ethnic classes of people trying to dominate each area of the country, each with its own oil reserves. But, the biggest problem with that is, the least amount of oil reserves is in the Sunni part of the country.

So here is my point....the Ottoman empire up until 1932 did not have the vast resources or the vast wealth problems to divide up evenly between 3 countries. And if that was not enough, they also did not have the problem of a civil war causing regional instability on the scale this war has caused.

The problems in Iraq will never have a fast fix, which we americans are always wanting to see. The problems with minority rule is way to big of an issue to even let the country split up into their own seperate things, let alone trying to keep this current Iraqi government in power to try and help piece back together a shattered country.

I do know this much...I would rather see Iraq united under one government, and the masses try to work together to solve their own internal problems, than I would see what happend in Somilia and Afghanistan, and end up being ruled by several warring clans who cannot and will not serve the people, and the country end up being a lawless safe haven for terrorists, like what happend with the Taliban government and the old Somilia government, and 25 years later we are back over there trying to root out terrorist cells because we could not do the job right the first time.

[8thidpathfinderpower]

History will be the final judge whether we should have went in a removed Saddam Huessiens government, and whether we had the right intel.

What I see most people forget, is that all the way back from the first gulf war with Iraq, the Iraqi government managed to mess up the terms of the cease fire, and we ended up going back over and bombing the place to send a message about the violations of the cease fire.

[Kilo]

What I see most people forget, is that all the way back from the first gulf war with Iraq, the Iraqi government managed to mess up the terms of the cease fire, and we ended up going back over and bombing the place to send a message about the violations of the cease fire.

when you bombed the place em 98 (Operation Desert Fox), UNSCOM had already destroy 90-95% of all WMD´s in Iraq

When Hans Blix´s UNMOVIC ( UNSCOM replacement) went back in ( few months before the War) they found nothing !

Back in the US, the Administration was manipulating evidence and information from the intel agencies (the bogus reports on uranium from Nigeria, the false links to Al Quaeda, "curveball"...) in order to "sell" this war to american citizens as a war on terrorism, on Al Quaeda, on Bin Laden, on WMD

You know now that those statements are false, most of us in Europe knew that before the war, that is why we had so many objections to the war

What astonishes me is how easy it was to trick the american people into war.

I think that is someting that americans citizens should reflect

[8thidpathfinderpower]

when you bombed the place em 98 (Operation Desert Fox), UNSCOM had already destroy 90-95% of all WMD´s in Iraq

When Hans Blix´s UNMOVIC ( UNSCOM replacement) went back in ( few months before the War) they found nothing !

Back in the US, the Administration was manipulating evidence and information from the intel agencies (the bogus reports on uranium from Nigeria, the false links to Al Quaeda, "curveball"...) in order to "sell" this war to american citizens as a war on terrorism, on Al Quaeda, on Bin Laden, on WMD

You know now that those statements are false, most of us in Europe knew that before the war, that is why we had so many objections to the war

What astonishes me is how easy it was to trick the american people into war.

I think that is someting that americans citizens should reflect

I will let history be the judge of that. But, in defense of the Bush team..(please note I am not a fan of Bush)....The Iraqi government did violate the cease fire agreement of the first gulf war, and were in the process (altho many years down the pike) of trying to obtain WMD. Either way we would have been drawn into a conflict, altho with possibly a different outcome.

[Dronetek]

This is like when democrats say, "We need a political solution, not a military one". Well no crap, but I dont think you are getting a political solution without the military victory solution first. It just dosnt work that way.

Its the same thing here. Yeah, Iraqis need to fix Iraq but they wont be able to do that until we have secured it.

[Herrmannek]

And who else if not Iraqis... Its their country and their life... They have our help, but nothing will hapens with them being inert like a stones...

[AZRON]

The whole Iraqi war was because Saddam tried to play both sides of the game.

While he played cat and mouse with U.N. inspectors at the same time trying to keep his Arab Macho image intact.

Plus the added factor that Saddam considered Iran his main enemy and wanted to bluff them into believing he may have WMDs , while trying to convince the West he didn't.

The result was a glass half full or half empty debate and Bush pushed for resolve of the situation.

[Hollis]

The whole Iraqi war was because Saddam tried to play both sides of the game.

While he played cat and mouse with U.N. inspectors at the same time trying to keep his Arab Macho image intact.

Plus the added factor that Saddam considered Iran his main enemy and wanted to bluff them into believing he may have WMDs , while trying to convince the West he didn't.

The result was a glass half full or half empty debate and Bush pushed for resolve of the situation.


Azron, amazing few understands, that Saddam was selling the world that he had them (WMDs). I guess the anti-US/War mantra just won't cut loose of the no WMD bs. There is a big difference in foresight and hindsight. The Anti-War/US group also ignores the 12 years and the other UN resolutions against Saddam.


Powell is right, and the anti-war/US group does not want the truth, that any solution is in the hands of the Iraqi People........... They will have victory or defeat. The US/MNF can only aid in that process. To the simple minded anti-war crowd, it is easier to blame Bush/US. After all to them, the US is the great evil of the world and poor old Saddam was just another innocent victim of unjustified aggression.

[Herrmannek]

Agree, They are the people to blame a cop that shot maniac and not the bastard who was posing his cellphone as a firearm provoking the cop.

[Kilo]

Powell is right, and the anti-war/US group does not want the truth, that any solution is in the hands of the Iraqi People........... They will have victory or defeat. The US/MNF can only aid in that process. To the simple minded anti-war crowd, it is easier to blame Bush/US. After all to them, the US is the great evil of the world and poor old Saddam was just another innocent victim of unjustified aggression.

your problem is that you insist in seeing the world as black and white


Saddam was a problem
he caused de the Gulf War in 91....a coalition of countries: US, europeans, arabs went to war
he lost the war
after the war UNSCOM was cretaed to destroy all iraqi WMD
they got were sucessful, by 98 they estimate that they had destroy 90% of the WMD
then Saddam started to play "cat and mouse", that is why the coalition bombed Iraq (Desert Fox)
4 years later Hans Blix went back in, he discovered nothing

Saddam was a still a problem, but a contain problem:

he had no WMD, no one found anything
he had a weak army
no fly zone in the north and south of iraq

He did not pose a threat to the USA

there were no links with Al Quaeda
he had nothing to do with 911


so the question arises, why did the US started a war in Iraq ?

[Herrmannek]

he had no WMD, no one found anything
he had a weak army
no fly zone in the north and south of iraq

He did not pose a threat to the USA

there were no links with Al Quaeda
he had nothing to do with 911


so the question arises, why did the US started a war in Iraq ?
And if you knew that before for sure why you haven't reported that to CIA?


Official one?
Saddam kicked out UN observers that were in process of verifying WMD accusations and because as you know he was on probation and no other sanctions were possible in this situation UN agreed on intervention.

[Mr. JOSHUA]

your problem is that you insist in seeing the world as black and white


Saddam was a problem
he caused de the Gulf War in 91....a coalition of countries: US, europeans, arabs went to war
he lost the war
after the war UNSCOM was cretaed to destroy all iraqi WMD
they got were sucessful, by 98 they estimate that they had destroy 90% of the WMD
then Saddam started to play "cat and mouse", that is why the coalition bombed Iraq (Desert Fox)
4 years later Hans Blix went back in, he discovered nothing

Saddam was a still a problem, but a contain problem:

he had no WMD, no one found anything
he had a weak army
no fly zone in the north and south of iraq

He did not pose a threat to the USA

there were no links with Al Quaeda
he had nothing to do with 911


so the question arises, why did the US started a war in Iraq ?


When a criminal murders, he loses a bunch of basic rights afforded to him when he was a law abiding citizen, example, he loses the right to legally purchase firearms.

Lets say this criminal was a mass or serial murderer, lets say the police received a tip this guy was aquiring weapons when a) legally, he's forbidden to do this b) he has murdered before and therefore is a threat to society c) since he is a threat to society and is aquiring weapons that he has murdered with before, he should be arrested immediately and prosecuted or would you rather wait till he commits another murder to proceed with justifiable action against him?

Zarqawi was known to have ties with Uday Hussein, received medical treatment in Iraq, was being hid there after he fled Afghanistan, Saddam paid $10,000 to the families of each suicide bomber targeting Israelis, if thats not some sort of connection to terrorism, then what is?

[Hollis]

your problem is that you insist in seeing the world as black and white






your projecting your problem. Keep clicking your heels, but guess what, you still won't be in Kansas Dorothy. (if you missed the movie Wizard of OZ... then what can I say?)

[Laworkerbee]

Saddam was playing poker with the big boys and had his bluff called.

what more can be said?

[AZRON]

Saddam was playing poker with the big boys and had his bluff called.

what more can be said?

That's it in a nutshell !

[Firetxmi]

Saddam was playing poker with the big boys and had his bluff called.

what more can be said?

Well, when we called it though turns out no one had a good hand!

To stay on topic though- how long will we hold this proverbial lid on? How long will we wait for the Iraqis to stand up?

[Laworkerbee]

Well, when we called it though turns out no one had a good hand!

Going all in with a great hand sometimes isn't the best idea either :)

Ok BOT

[Firetxmi]

Going all in with a great hand sometimes isn't the best idea either :)

Precisely!

[AZRON]

Well, when we called it though turns out no one had a good hand!

To stay on topic though- how long will we hold this proverbial lid on? How long will we wait for the Iraqis to stand up?

I give it until Sept.-Nov. , if we aren't downsizing by then with reduced violence it will probably be all over as those facing the next election cycle in the GOP will be running scared.

As I read it so far the surge is rated B-. Need power , water in a consistant manner.
It's a plus for the U.S. that Sadr and his gang of cutthroats are hiding under the bed with more than 700 in clink.

[Dronetek]

after the war UNSCOM was cretaed to destroy all iraqi WMD
they got were sucessful, by 98 they estimate that they had destroy 90% of the WMD
then Saddam started to play "cat and mouse", that is why the coalition bombed Iraq (Desert Fox)
LoL, ignoring just a little bit in between 91 and 98?

http://www.mideastweb.org/iraqtimelineunscom.htm

16 May 1991 Iraq submits revised declarations covering additional chemical weapons and a refinement of its missile declaration.
(which turned out to be a lie, as he was hiding large amounts of Anthrax)

Jun 1991 UNSCOM/IAEA inspectors try to intercept Iraqi vehicles loaded with nuclear related equipment (Calutrons). Iraqi personnel fire warning shots to prevent the inspectors from approaching the vehicles. The equipment is later seized and destroyed under international supervision.

6 Sep 1991 The first heliborne UNSCOM inspection team is blocked by Iraq.

Sep 1991 IAEA inspectors find large amounts of documentation relating to Iraq's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. The Iraqi officials confiscate some documents from the inspectors. The inspectors refuse to yield a second set of documents. In response, Iraq refuses to allow the team to leave the site with these documents. A four-day standoff ensues, during which the team remains in the parking lot of the site. Iraq permits the team to leave with the documents after a statement from the Security Council threatens enforcement actions.

6-29 Jul 1992 Iraq refuses an inspection team access to the Iraqi Ministry of Agriculture. UNSCOM said it had reliable information that the site contained archives related to proscribed activities. Inspectors gained access only after members of the Council threatened enforcement action.

Nov 1995 The government of Jordan intercepts a large shipment of high-grade missile components destined for Iraq. Iraq denies that it had sought to purchase these components, while acknowledging that some of them were in Iraq. An UNSCOM investigation concludes that Iraqi authorities and missile facilities have been involved in acquiring sophisticated guidance and control components for proscribed missiles. UNSCOM retrieves additional missile components, apparently disposed of by the Iraqis involved in the covert acquisition, from the Tigris River.

Mar 1996 Iraqi security forces refuse UNSCOM teams access to five sites designated for inspection. The teams enter the sites after delays of up to 17 hours.

Hmmmm, more delay tactics. I wonder what they were doing with all that extra time?



19 Mar 1996 The Security Council issues a presidential statement expressing its concern over Iraq's behavior, which it terms "a clear violation of Iraq's obligations under relevant resolutions." The council also demands that Iraq allow UNSCOM teams immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to all sites designated for inspection.

Jun 1996 Iraq denies UNSCOM teams access to sites under investigation for their involvement in the "concealment mechanism" for proscribed items.

13 Jun 1996 Despite the adoption of Resolution 1060, Iraq again denies access to another inspection team. The council issues a presidential statement, which condemns the failure of Iraq to comply with that resolution. The council also asks that the UNSCOM executive chairman visit Baghdad to secure access to all sites the commission designates for inspection.

What was Saddam doing during all this time? You make it sound like UNSCOM went in and cleaned house, but its obvious they did nothing of the sort.



21 Jun 1997 Iraq again blocks UNSCOM teams from entering certain sites for inspection.

13 Sep 1997 An Iraqi officer attacks an UNSCOM inspector on board an UNSCOM helicopter while the inspector was attempting to take photographs of unauthorized movement of Iraqi vehicles inside a site designated for inspection.

17 Sep 1997 While seeking access to a site declared by Iraq to be "sensitive," UNSCOM inspectors witness and videotape Iraqi guards moving files, burning documents, and dumping ash-filled waste cans into a nearby river.

Oct 1997 UNSCOM completes the destruction of additional large quantities of chemical weapons, related equipment, and precursor chemicals. Iraq had previously denied that some of the equipment had been used for chemical weapons production. Iraq admitted in May 1997, following an UNSCOM investigation, that some of the equipment had been used in the production of VX.

They completed destruction of the weapons Saddam allowed them to find...



Dec 17-20, 1998 Extensive US and British bombardment of Iraq in ‘Operation Desert Fox’, after UNSCOM head reports Iraq’s failure to fully cooperate; after end of the operation, Iraq again refuses UNSCOM permission to reenter Iraq, and US & UK continue bombardment, aimed at Iraq’s air defense capacity.

But, I thought UNSCOM was sure they got rid of everything? Why the need to reenter?

[Kilo]

But, I thought UNSCOM was sure they got rid of everything? Why the need to reenter?

tell me again how many WMD have you found since you enter Iraq ?




The invasion of Iraq was because geopolitics and strategic interests, aka oil


Not because WMD, "war on terrorism", 911, Al Queada or Bin Laden....the thinhs you were told were the "main reasons"


This is my point.


But even this strategy failed:

Iraq in not under control but in verge of civil war
the war has increased Islamic radicalism, and has made the terror threat around the world worse
iraq oil output is down

in the process at least 70.000 iraqis (most of them civilians) and 3.000 us soldiers are death, and hundreds of thousands have left the country