.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Nominal Me

I'm falling in love with my camera and taking photos everywhere I go. That, combined with my passions for politics, sports, religion and other things we all agree on, makes this blog persist.

My Photo
Location: Astoria, New York, United States

I'm born in Manhattan and raised in Queens.

Wednesday, January 12, 2005

"Weapons of Mass Destruction" Search Ends In Iraq

According to the Washington Post, the coalition's search for weapons of mass destruction, conducted by the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), ended in December.

The article, by WoPo staff writer Dafna Linzer, notes:

Four months after Charles A. Duelfer, who led the weapons hunt in 2004, submitted an interim report to Congress that contradicted nearly every prewar assertion about Iraq made by top Bush administration officials, a senior intelligence official said the findings will stand as the ISG's final conclusions and will be published this spring.

This comes as no surprise to readers of my blog, as I leaked the news of the absence of arms a few months ago (OK, maybe my sources weren't as good as the Washington Post's).

The finality of this decision is found later on in the article:

Intelligence officials said there is little left for the ISG to investigate because Duelfer's last report answered as many outstanding questions as possible. The ISG has interviewed every person it could find connected to programs that ended more than 10 years ago, and every suspected site within Iraq has been fully searched, or stripped bare by insurgents and thieves, according to several people involved in the weapons hunt.

Satellite photos show that entire facilities have been dismantled, possibly by scrap dealers who sold off parts and equipment to buyers around the world.

"The September 30 report is really pretty much the picture," the intelligence official said.

The cost of the search -- forgetting the war for a moment -- is classified, and will remain so. The WoPo article estimates that it ran in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

In the end, is may have been Saddam Hussein's attempt at being coy about the weapons that ultimately led to the current coalition occupation of Iraq; support for the sanctions against Iraq were waning, and Hussein was trying to have his cake and eat it too. He wanted his neighbors to think he had weapons, so they would not invade his country, and he wanted the U.N. to think he had none, so the sanctions would be lifted.

At least that's the latest theory.

Hussein being coy came at a great loss to him, and us.

We are now officially at a loss to say why we invaded Iraq in the first place, and now as a nation have to cling to the hope that the end will ultimately justify the means.

If democracy takes hold, and a peaceful Iraq is created, then we may ultimately forget why the war happened in the first place.

In reality, the question of whether the weapons were there was answered long after it became moot. We are there, and the outcome of our presence there will have an affect on us for some time to come.

Those who were against the war before it started win nothing for "being right".

Those who were for it from the start, may never have to explain themselves.

But all is still well in the home front. While the search for weapons of mass destruction has ended, OJ's search for the real killer continues.

More politics.

Links of interest:

Direct link to the cartoon above.

October 2, 2003 update on the weapons search.

The comprehensive report, dated September 30, 2004

CNN story on the weapons search ending.

Eschaton's comment about the search's end.

Pro war's comments.

Waveflux's comments.

Running Scared's comments (a "former Republican").

Samuel Johnson says that now that Bush is re-elected, there is no need for a weapons search.

Old Fasioned Patriot's comments.

Dohiyi Mir chimes in.

FreedomDrone says "I told you so".

Fresh Paint piles it on.

Esoterically says Bush lied.

I'm looking for a conservative point of view, but can't seem to find one. If you know of one, please put your links in the comments section.


Bush says it was worth it.


Blogger Angry Dan said...

Interesting: says we invaded so that WMDs wouldn't end up in the hands of "terrorists" and yet eludes to a very possible reality that shortly after our invasion when the country was in chaos that some of these same bunkers were looted and disassembled for scrap or sale on the black market leaving us wondering 'what happened to the crap inside?'

You know, getting back to that whole reason we invaded thing.

Wednesday, 12 January, 2005  
Blogger Nominal Me said...

There is a circular logic here that is unfortunate. It puts people in an odd situation. If you're against the war, you can't hope our troops fail; if you are for it, you can't really justify its initial basis of support. I don't know if there's any historical parrallel to this.

Wednesday, 12 January, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congratulations! I'm conducting a hunt for the missing public outrage over the failure to find those pesky WMDs. Your post qualifies, and has been added to an ever growing list at http://consilience.typepad.com/teachers_lounge/2005/01/historycurrent_.html. BYOWMDs


Saturday, 22 January, 2005  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WMD's did exist. How do you thnk Saddam killed thousands of his own countrymen? Do you think he personally shot them all? We went to Irag and remain in Irag because it was the right thing to do. It's not about domination, it's about compassion. Saddam and his cronies were butchering innocent people. How could we not help? Your left-wing hero Clinton did the same thing in Kosovo. It was pehaps the one time he did something right.

Monday, 18 April, 2005  

Post a Comment


<< Home