Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United States Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Assad’s fall could solve Iraqi weapons mystery
CJH    1/22/2012 9:47:00 PM

Assad’s fall could solve Iraqi weapons mystery

"Western and Israeli intelligence suspect that Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria also owns weaponized nerve agents. Spy satellites tracked a large number of truck convoys moving from Iraq to Syria in the weeks before the 2003 invasion, raising suspicions that some carried weapons of mass destruction. The invading Americans never found stocks of such weapons in Iraq, despite two years of searching by the Iraq Survey Group. The result spurred the political left to attack President Bush with slogans such as “Bush lied, troops died,” but nonpartisan national security figures said there was evidence that material may have been moved to Syria. There was just no way to get inside the Iranian-supported dictatorship to take a look. Zuhdi Jasser, a Syrian-American physician who co-founded the group Save Syria Now, is working to bring an elected secular government to Damascus. He said the Assad regime, which has used brutal repression to remain in power, can fall within a year if the popular uprising comes to the capital."

 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT
CJH       1/22/2012 9:48:03 PM

Western and Israeli intelligence... suspect that Bashar Assad...’s regime in Syria... also owns weaponized nerve agents.

Spy satellites tracked a large number of truck convoys moving from Iraq... to Syria... in the weeks before the 2003 invasion, raising suspicions that some carried weapons of mass destruction.

The invading Americans never found stocks of such weapons in Iraq..., despite two years of searching by the Iraq Survey Group....

The result spurred the political left to attack President Bush... with slogans such as “Bush... lied, troops died,” but nonpartisan national security figures said there was evidence that material may have been moved to Syria.... There was just no way to get inside the Iranian-supported dictatorship to take a look.

Zuhdi Jasser..., a Syrian-American physician who co-founded the group Save Syria Now..., is working to bring an elected secular government to Damascus. He said the Assad regime, which has used brutal repression to remain in power, can fall within a year if the popular uprising comes to the capital.

 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       1/25/2012 5:02:12 AM
Interesting theory...
 
It does beg one or two questions though, how come no one has come forward with any conclusive evidence and why would Assad put himself in the firing line by taking such a risk if discovered.
 
Those WMD's are an enigma.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       1/25/2012 11:41:43 AM
CJH, it won't happen that way.
 
The Sunni Islamists (mainly Muslim Brotherhood in Syria) who are trying to topple Assad's Alawite/Shia regime will never disclose those even if they did exist.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH    http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/02/24/exclusive_state_department_quietly_warning_region_on_syrian_wmds   2/24/2012 4:26:04 PM
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       2/24/2012 4:38:53 PM
CJH, it won't happen that way.   The Sunni Islamists (mainly Muslim Brotherhood in Syria) who are trying to topple Assad's Alawite/Shia regime will never disclose those even if they did exist.
 
 What if they cannot prevent access by people who will diclose?
 
Quote    Reply

smitty237    It won't matter   2/24/2012 6:46:08 PM
It is already gospel among Liberal and their patsies in the media that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.  If they are found in Syria "experts" will unilaterally declare that the weapons belonged to Syria, and if there is overwhelming evidence that the weapons were Iraqi then the same pundits will declare that the evidence is manufactured.  More likely, the discoveries would be absolutely ignored.  There are a number of eyewitness accounts of weapons being moved to Syria prior to the US invasion in 2003, and several caches of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq, but those stories have been dismissed out of hand by the Libs.  There is nothing you can present, and nothing that can be uncovered, that will convince the Bush haters that he was right about Iraq.  NOTHING.
   
CJH, it won't happen that way.   The Sunni Islamists (mainly Muslim Brotherhood in Syria) who are trying to topple Assad's Alawite/Shia regime will never disclose those even if they did exist.
 
     
 What if they cannot prevent access by people who will diclose?
  
 
Quote    Reply

Plutarch       2/26/2012 9:54:05 AM

I am amazed this myth is still being perpetrated on these forums after all these years, and all this debunking.  I have often wondered why: is it because of stubbornness, ignorance,  or something else? I suppose it needs going over one more time though.

Iraqwatch  is a good web site since it has all the UNSCOM and UNMOVIC reports, these are considered primary sources.

Iraq declared to UNSCOM that at one time it held over 200,000 special munitions, either filled or unfilled, specifically designed for chemical or biological weapons. These included grenades, mortar shells, aerial bombs, artillery shells, rockets and missile warheads. Of those, Iraq claimed that it used or disposed of approximately 100,000 munitions filled with chemical weapons during the period of its war with Iran, which ended in 1988. With regard to its holdings as of January 1991, Iraq asserted that 127,941 filled and unfilled special munitions remained in the country. During the first Gulf War -- according to Iraq -- 41,998 munitions were destroyed by Allied bombing, and Iraq also said that it unilaterally destroyed 29,662 munitions after the first Gulf War. The remaining 56,281 special munitions were either destroyed or accounted for under UNSCOM supervision.

(There is a Table there that confirms this but it is too big to post in this software).

What this all means is that 550 155mm shells were the material balance of Iraq’s CW program after 1991. These shells were lost, misplaced, mixed in with conventional shells, or otherwise beyond the reach of the regime.

Approximately 500 shells are alleged to have been recovered in post-war Iraq. Iraq in total produced some 200,000+ special munitions (both filled and unfilled). 100,000 of these were consumed in the Iran-Iraq war. Now unexploded ordinances from World War II are still being discovered in Germany, and Okinawa, among other places 65+  years after that war, so it stands to reason that these recovered shells could have been expended in the war (misfires or discarded), or part of the missing 550 shells, or  somehow shells that escaped destruction by UNSCOM. In any case they were beyond the regime’s command and control.

 There is no evidence that Iraq had any nuclear program at any time after 1991. Additionally, biological weapons were determined to have been destroyed unilaterally by Iraq in 1991 in a haphazard way that made accounting for the entire program impossible.

Thus, it is pretty definitive what happened to Iraq’s weapons program. The discrepancies in numbers trying to verify massive numbers of shells and the shoddy way in which Iraq unilaterally disposed of  its BW, and some of its CW, components in 1991 account for most, if not all, of the misunderstanding surrounding the proscribed weapons programs. In the end the Iraq WMD issue was probably more about bureaucratic inefficiencies and a fundamental misunderstanding of regime intent by Washington than anything sinister on the part of Iraq.

 Stating that Iraq had WMD because of the 500 chemical shells uncovered is like saying that they had WMD because 550 metric tons of uranium was found there (not HEU). The uranium was known about by the IAEA. It was tagged by the IAEA and left there long before the war started. The shells were known about prior to the war, or at least accounted for in Iraqi declarations so they were not part of a clandestine program.

So let me ask: What specifically do any of you who read this post and care to respond think was sent to Syria?

 
Quote    Reply

smitty237    Plutarch (Part 1)   3/9/2012 11:37:17 PM
I am amazed this myth is still being perpetrated on these forums after all these years, and all this debunking.  I have often wondered why: is it because of stubbornness, ignorance,  or something else? I suppose it needs going over one more time though.
You end up pretty much making my point, but I'll play along. 

Iraqwatch  is a good web site since it has all the UNSCOM and UNMOVIC reports, these are considered primary sources.

Of course they are.  The UN is known for objectivity fairness, especially when it comes to the United States.  Let's not forget that there were a number of UN resolutions that were passed leading up to the lead up to war in 2005.  The intelligence agencies of most of the countries in the UN (including the Security Council) believed the "myth" that Iraq possessed and/or was developing weapons of mass destruction. 

Iraq declared to UNSCOM that at one time it held over 200,000 special munitions, either filled or unfilled, specifically designed for chemical or biological weapons. These included grenades, mortar shells, aerial bombs, artillery shells, rockets and missile warheads. Of those, Iraq claimed that it used or disposed of approximately 100,000 munitions filled with chemical weapons during the period of its war with Iran, which ended in 1988. With regard to its holdings as of January 1991, Iraq asserted that 127,941 filled and unfilled special munitions remained in the country. During the first Gulf War -- according to Iraq -- 41,998 munitions were destroyed by Allied bombing, and Iraq also said that it unilaterally destroyed 29,662 munitions after the first Gulf War. The remaining 56,281 special munitions were either destroyed or accounted for under UNSCOM supervision.-
 
So Iraqi claims that it used or disposed of 100,000 chemical munitions during the war with Iran is reliable information?  We are also supposed to treat as reliable that Allied bombing destroyed and 42,000 munitions (give or take)?  Not only that, but we are to believe their claims that they destroyed another 30,000 munitions?  They only statistic there that I regard as reasonable reliable is that the UN destroyed or accounted for over 56,000 munitions.  I will certainly accept that number since I would assume the UN kept reliable records. 
 
(There is a Table there that confirms this but it is too big to post in this software).

- --
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

smitty237    Plutarch (Part 2)   3/9/2012 11:39:21 PM
What this all means is that 550 155mm shells were the material balance of Iraq’s CW program after 1991. These shells were lost, misplaced, mixed in with conventional shells, or otherwise beyond the reach of the regime.
Really?  And how do we know this?  Is it also possible that those shells were cached separately and set aside specifically by the regime?  Iraq was soundly defeated and driven out of Kuwait in 1991, but unlike 2003, after the war large portions of the country remained under control of Hussein's forces.  Don't you think there is probably a good reason that the Iraqis didn't allow UN access to certain facilities throughout the country?  That is one thing the WMD "deniers" (for lack of a better term) never seem to address.  Saddam Hussein could have prevented the 2005 war simply by allowing the UN inspectors unlimited access to anything they wanted to inspect, so why didn't he?  Isn't there even a shred of intellectual curiosity about that?  "Beyond the reach of the regime?"  Again, how do we know that?
Approximately 500 shells are alleged to have been recovered in post-war Iraq. Iraq in total produced some 200,000+ special munitions (both filled and unfilled). 100,000 of these were consumed in the Iran-Iraq war. Now unexploded ordinances from World War II are still being discovered in Germany, and Okinawa, among other places 65+  years after that war, so it stands to reason that these recovered shells could have been expended in the war (misfires or discarded), or part of the missing 550 shells, or  somehow shells that escaped destruction by UNSCOM. In any case they were beyond the regime’s command and control.
Now you're reaching.  We aren't talking about unexploded ordnance, were talking about weapons that are still capable of being used.  Unexploded ordnance would be included under the 100,000 munitions that they admit to using, wouldn't they?
There is no evidence that Iraq had any nuclear program at any time after 1991. Additionally, biological weapons were determined to have been destroyed unilaterally by Iraq in 1991 in a haphazard way that made accounting for the entire program impossible.
No one is talking about a nuclear program, so let's just move past that one.  That second sentence is almost laughable.  So the Iraqis "unilaterally" destroyed all their biological weapons, but did it in such a "haphazard way" that we are unable to verify that they did so?  Do you really expect us to buy that as evidence that the Iraqis didn't have biological weapons from 1991 to 2003, and couldn't have possibly moved them to Syria?
Thus, it is pretty definitive what happened to Iraq’s weapons program. The discrepancies in numbers trying to verify massive numbers of shells and the shoddy way in which Iraq unilaterally disposed of  its BW, and some of its CW, components in 1991 account for most, if not all, of the misunderstanding surrounding the proscribed weapons programs. In the end the Iraq WMD issue was probably more about bureaucratic inefficiencies and a fundamental misunderstanding of regime intent by Washington than anything sinister on the part of Iraq.
It may be definitive to you and the other Bush haters, but none of the "evidence" you've provided has proven anything to me.  You don't even take into consideration WMDs that Iraq might have developed secretly.  During the lead up to war in 2003 the Iraqis had plenty of time to move the weapons and destroy any records that would prove those weapons existed.  Why is this so implausible? 
 
 
Quote    Reply

smitty237    Plutarch (part 3)   3/9/2012 11:41:05 PM
Stating that Iraq had WMD because of the 500 chemical shells uncovered is like saying that they had WMD because 550 metric tons of uranium was found there (not HEU). The uranium was known about by the IAEA. It was tagged by the IAEA and left there long before the war started. The shells were known about prior to the war, or at least accounted for in Iraqi declarations so they were not part of a clandestine program.
Again, we are not talking about just 500 chemical shells, but other WMDs that Iraq might have possessed or were developing.  155mm shells are identifiable as munitions, but aerosol cans containg anthrax, bubonic plague, or whatever, are not.  To my knowledge no one is talking about non-HEU uranium, so I don't know where that is coming from.  I think it is safe to say anything developed as part of a clandestine program would NOT be declared by the Iraqis.  That's where the whole clandestine part comes in.
 

 
So let me ask: What specifically do any of you who read this post and care to respond think was sent to Syria?
 
Well, for one, how about 500 or so 155mm shells loaded with chemical agents that have not been accounted for?  If not that, then what about biological or chemical agents that may have been developed as part of a clandestine program and were never declared by the Iraqis?  Just for giggles I Googled "Iraqi WMDs moved to Syria", or something like that, and came up with a large number of stories from a variety of different sources that describe accounts of Iraqi weapons being transported to Syria during the lead up to war in 2003.  Some of the sources for these stories are members of Hussein's regime.  I've also heard of accounts from servicemen that served in Iraq(including a US Army officer this morning) that have said that many Iraqis say openly that WMDs were moved to Syria by Hussein and his henchmen.  It would be nice if there were written records that proved this, but one lesson that dictators learned from the Nazis is that meticulous record keeping can get you hanged if you have the poor fortune of losing the war, something I'm sure the Hussein regime knew was going to happen.  Again, the Iraqis had plenty of time to destroy such records even if they existed. 
 
The entire point of my post is that even IF the Assad regime collapsed and evidence was uncovered that Iraqi WMDs were moved to Syria in 2003, there are elements in the Left and the media that will refuse to accept it.  It is an article of faith amongst those folks that Bush was lying about WMDs in Iraq, and nothing will ever change that.  I can be convinced that the intelligence agencies of the US, Russia, Britain, France, and Israel were mistaken about Iraq possessing WMDs.  What would it take for you to accept that Iraq did in fact possess WMDs?
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics