5 Days Left
The missing weapons story seems to have more and more twists to it. Like a Stephen King book the story keeps getting more complex. Now it appears that the Russians are involved here. Check here for details. Now I took some heat for my last post. Can I ask the question now..does THIS change anything?
I recall two things leading up to the war in Iraq. Ed telling me that France and Russia didn't realyl "care" too much about the war in Iraq. He claimed that the two countries would benefit from keeping Saddam in power. I am not going to get into that whole thing(unless I can better research it and actually have time) and sadly Ed is still out in desert training. I talked to him the other day and he has no e-mail access at all! What stinker no Ed for blog writing up to the election! For those of you that care he will be home to cast his vote on Nov,2.
Anyway, the 2nd thing I recall was someone I am close friends with here (we all know his name, but I am paranoid about typing it) was in Iraq in early 2003 when the war started. He had told me one time when I asked him about the WMDs that it was common knowledge among people he talked to that "Stuff" was moved to Syria. Not to say that is where the WMDs went, but that isn't impossible. However, this story seems to gel with the stories I heard from my friend and a few others that were over there about weapons being moved to Syria. Remember everyone kept saying we were going to invade Syria over a year ago? When I have time I will see if Drew, or I blogged about it.
Is this Bush's October suprise that we have been hearing so much about?
5 Days to the general election, but does it really matter the Red Sox has won the world Series the world is likely to end sometime tomorrow.
This weekend Tucker's World will announce it's official edorsement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I'm sure I mentioned the Syria thing, but I'm not sure when or exactly what my attitude was at the time.
A for this story, I'm highly skeptical. First of all, I'm skeptical of everything I read in the Washington Moonie Times. It's a right-wing rag owned by a man who believes that he is the Messiah, and that he is worshipped in Heaven by Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Hitler and Stalin. No shit. The guy is nuts.
But that doesn't mecessarily implicate the newspaper he owns. However, it should be pointed out that the story is sourced entirely to two officials, one unnamed. The named official is John Shaw, Undersecretary of Defense. There is absolutely no corroboration. Even worse, the story is contradicted by existing evidence that was conveniently left out of the argument, such as first hand accounts of Iraqis who claim that the cite was looted after te U.S. troops left. It's also conspicuoulsy vague on exactly wh the Russians would want to move this stuff to Syria. If anyone can fill me in on that, I'd be greatful.
And notwithstanding the fact that many reasonable, intelligent, and clearthinking people believed that Iraq had WMD before the war started, and moved them to Syria, we now know conclusively that Iraq didn't have any WMDs at all, ever, since the first Gulf War. We know that. It's a fact.
But, to be fair, I can't say for certain that the Moonie Times story is false. As far as I know, it might be true. But I doubt it, and I have to say that I think it's on pretty thin ice. For more information on John Shaw, the source of the story, and Bill Gertz, the author of the story, see today's LiberalOasis. Just to provide another viewpoint for everyone's due consideration.
Thanks for the link, Drew.
Well I am watching news now (I am generally cut off during the day) and it looks like that Kerry and Bush are now making this a big issue and debating again.
Do you think these claims from the Russians are false? I mean do you think this people were misquoted?
I also heard that the amount of weapons is a lot less than originally thought now. Anyone have a link on that?
What claims from the Russians? The WashTimes story you linked is claims from the Pentagon about the Russians.
I've also heard some stuff about it being a lot less explosives than we were originally told, but I don't know where that's coming from, or what the basis of that claim is.
But it looks like the question of when the explosives were stolen has been definitively settled. One of the news organizations, I think it's ABCNews, has photographic and video evidence which proves the explosives were there when the soldiers first arrived. This comes from photos and videos taken by embedded journalists who were there at the same time. Apparently, the troops walked in, broke the IAEA seals, found the explosives, and then left the barn door open, so to speak.
It's definitely a screw up. Knowing exactly how much explosives were looted will tell us how bad of a screw up. It turns out that this same type of explosives was used to blow up Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. If the amount cited in the original NYT story holds up (nearly 380 tons), the terrorists would have scored enough explosives for literally thousands of Pan Am 103s.
Well did the Russians actually come out and say what the hell are you talking about?
Now the US troops are saying they did it.
Keeps changing over and over again.
I didn't have time to write about the pictures you are talking about Drew. At this point since the story keeps changing, I will just say lets discuss it under this article.
Unless of course people from Mars claim they moved the weapons.
Hey when are we going to Mars?
Post a Comment