A Question Everybody Avoids Answering

Another point worth making is how he doesn't seem too interested in terrorism since we killed part of his family in that bombing of Lybia in the 1980's.</font>[/QUOTE]You don't know that.
He simply was much less vocal about claims of terrorism. How do you know he wasn't still funding those who commit terrorism?

Either way, he is still in power.

Regards,
BiR

 

I respectfully disagree with you on this one. I think he has other motives.

Regards to you, brother,
BiR

 

When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing

Bill Arkin

By William M. Arkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Monday, Feb. 1, 1999

"Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government." So begins a statement being delivered by Gen. Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations Command.

At least the voice sounds amazingly like him.

But it is not Steiner. It is the result of voice "morphing" technology developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy of the tape.

Steiner was hardly the first or last victim to be spoofed by Papcun's team members. To refine their method, they took various high quality recordings of generals and experimented with creating fake statements. One of the most memorable is Colin Powell stating "I am being treated well by my captors."

"They chose to have him say something he would never otherwise have said," chuckled one of Papcun's colleagues.

Wasington Post

Isn't technology wonderful?

 

I'm saying that "voice morphing" technology has been around since 1999. And we all know what can be done with video. Forrest Gump. Nuff said.

 

They did answer it.

They had catalogued weapons and potential finds that have not been accounted for. Part of the dispute was that Saddam claimed he had destroyed weapons that weren't properly documented and overseen. Some claimed that they could find and destroy all the weapons if given a chance... not that they had done so. Even so, they couldn't have taken away his ability or will to produce, use, or distribute more.

 

And they were never allowed to finish their inspections.

 

If I recall correctly... and Daisy even alluded to this in one of her posts... Saddam kicked the inspectors out then let them come back in... to find nothing.

IOW's, this may have been a miscalculation on his part. He possibly thought that temporarily moving them would get the heat off and provide him with a justification for kicking the inspectors out permanently. This also provides an explanation for why he claimed to have destroyed weapons without verification.

 

Yes they were. As far as Saddam was concerned, they were done. He had kicked them out and was prepared to do so again. He thought his ruse had worked.

 

Moderator Note: Personal attacks have been and will continue to be deleted. Please debate the issue. Thanks.

Lady Eagle,
Moderator

 

Wow... Did Poncho report that exchange? A little pot calling the kettle black on that one...

 

If I recall correctly... and Daisy even alluded to this in one of her posts... Saddam kicked the inspectors out then let them come back in... to find nothing.

IOW's, this may have been a miscalculation on his part. He possibly thought that temporarily moving them would get the heat off and provide him with a justification for kicking the inspectors out permanently. This also provides an explanation for why he claimed to have destroyed weapons without verification. </font>[/QUOTE]This doesn't make sense. Saddam has never cared about world opinion. The best example of this was his disregard for all of the warnings not to invade Kuwait.
Saddam has used WMD's on the Kurds, and on the Iranians. When faced with overwhelming force, he chose the spider over using the WMD's that he went through such trouble to produce. Besides, we were watching every single site in question. If they would have moved them, then we would have known. The Bush Administration was very clear about their intentions to remove him from power. Moving them temporarily would have accomplished nothing, as he would be removed from power.

If he had them, he would have used them, just as he used them in the past.

Regards,
BiR

 

No, poncho never pushed the Report Post button. Your friendly Moderator, with the EAGLE eye, long talons, and very sharp beak was surfing around the various threads, ever ready to snip and delete personal attacks, trying to rescue members from potential banning for breaking posting rules. Just because we moderators may not be posting all the time, doesn't mean we aren't present, all knowing and all seeing. See?

Okay, nevermind.

 

Sometimes you make sense!

 

If I recall correctly... and Daisy even alluded to this in one of her posts... Saddam kicked the inspectors out then let them come back in... to find nothing.

IOW's, this may have been a miscalculation on his part. He possibly thought that temporarily moving them would get the heat off and provide him with a justification for kicking the inspectors out permanently. This also provides an explanation for why he claimed to have destroyed weapons without verification. </font>[/QUOTE]This doesn't make sense. Saddam has never cared about world opinion. </font>[/QUOTE] He did to the extent that it was necessary to know what he could get away with. It was "world opinion" that forced the inspectors on him in the first place. If he could manipulate that opinion or divide it... then he could be rid of them.

That's a terrible example. I like GWB and think that he is honestly trying to do what he thinks is right. He went against his father's "new world order" on Iraq.

OTOH, I didn't like nor trust Bush I at all. I think he baited Saddam and gave him every reason to believe that the US would only protest if he took Kuwait. And yes... I think he did it purposefully so he could pull together a "united" world conscience to police evil doers in the wake of the end of the Cold War.

I believe it is plausible that he hid them to foil the inspectors but was being watched too closely to get them back and deploy them before the invasion.

A calculated risk he lost on.

Nope. The inspectors were there... he gave them the boot... then "buckled" to world pressure and let them back in.

Now the kicker is that Saddam didn't account for weapons the inspectors had identified and designated for destruction. He said he destroyed them but did he?

Saddam probably expected Bush 2 to behave like Bush 1 and wait on world consensus. It would have been a reasonable assumption... especially considering his culture.

If they had been deployed... no doubt you are correct. If they were buried in remote areas or hidden in Syria... then they wouldn't have been deployable.