You won’t see much examination of this in the anti-Bush/Iraq war MSM, but the NY Sun has an article up today that quotes Saddam’s number 2 air force guy as saying Saddam’s WMD were moved to Syria before the Iraq war:
The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein’s air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.
The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, “Saddam’s Secrets,” released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.
“There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands,” Mr. Sada said. “I am confident they were taken over.”
Mr. Sada’s comments come just more than a month after Israel’s top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Yaalon, told the Sun that Saddam “transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria.”
It’s a lengthy piece, well worth printing and reading when you have some time. If this guy is correct, this is pretty explosive (no pun intended) stuff.
Don’t forget that former UNSCOM inspector Bill Tierney speculated in an interview with Frontpage Magazine last November that they had been moved to Syria as well. And also keep in mind Sen. Jay Rockefeller’s visit to Syria back in January of 2002 where he told Syria - an ally of Iraq - that he believed President Bush had already made up his mind to invade Iraq.
Just some food for thought.
(Hat tip: Atlas Shrugs)
Make sure to check out Rick Moran’s post on this. Publius Rendezvous is blogging on it as well.
More: Macsmind is on the same wavelength re: Sen. Jay Rockefeller.
Why weren’t the UN inspectors there to see this happen?
Comment by andrew @ 1/26/2006 - 10:19 am
This is long overdue to come out. It’s exactly what I’ve believed, and have had intimated to me by various people who are in positions to know more than I do.
Don’t expect it to get any press though. A plot to use chemical weapons in a terrorist attack were thwarted in Syria almost two years ago, using chem weapons that undoubtedly came from Iraq, but that got swept under the rug as well.
Doesn’t fit the BUSH LIED meme the press is so anxious to promote.
Comment by Severian @ 1/26/2006 - 10:41 am
This does not surprise me as there were so many other countries saying that Iraq had WMD’s we had satellite photos of them moving equipment before the buffoons from the U.N. arrived. The only people that did not believe that Iraq had WMD’s are liberals with the same mental capacity as Cindy Sheehan and the MSM who will print anything that makes the Bush administration look bad and won’t print anything that makes “W” look good.
Comment by Jim M @ 1/26/2006 - 11:16 am
Andrew, because Saddam did not allow it. The UN Inspectors were the keystone cops of the Middle East and only UN Worshippers did not see that as well as Saddam ignoring 17 UN Security Council Resolutions.
Comment by PCD @ 1/26/2006 - 11:18 am
You know I’m curious are those the chemical weapons in the deal that Rummy brokered with Saddam? Shoot folks the stench of BS coming from the neo-con wing of the G.O.P. would knock a skunk on it’s ass.
Comment by tommy in nyc @ 1/26/2006 - 11:38 am
tommy, you got some proof of your BS? Is this another one of your repeated mischaracterizations?
Comment by PCD @ 1/26/2006 - 11:43 am
Too much pot Tommy. Please site proof for your incessant inaccurate accusations.
Comment by Baklava @ 1/26/2006 - 12:00 pm
Wasn’t there a song by the Who about Tommy something about “That deaf, dumb and blind kid”? If the truth smacked Tommy on both cheeks (He would have to remove his head first) he still wouldn’t believe it. Tommy why don’t you join Cindy Sheehan down in Venezuela in a love fest with Hugo Chavez you can all hold hands and sing “Kum-By-Ya” oh and invite Jimmy Carter to. I’ll bet you believed Bill Clinton; he had a propensity for telling the truth and one of my favorite Democrats Teddy Kennedy who told the truth about Mary Jo Kopechne and Chappaquiddick!
Comment by Jim M @ 1/26/2006 - 12:15 pm
Ms. Underestimated Has a link to the video of the General on Hannity and Colmes.
If the left believes anonymous CIA leakers, why do they ignore one of Saddam’s generals, UNLESS the MSM has a political agenda.
Comment by PCD @ 1/26/2006 - 12:49 pm
A nice story from the conservative perspective, but count on it not being believed until we actually put our hands on those weapons, period.
It would be nice if we did that in, oh, mid-October.
Comment by Dana @ 1/26/2006 - 12:56 pm
Well we could go back to all the way back to the start of the cold war thru both dem and G.O.P Adminstrations in history to see some of the really unethical things our Federal government have done you wish but i’m working at the moment. That’s all I was merely trying to point out.
So lighten up a little out there sh*t you only live once.
Comment by tommy in nyc @ 1/26/2006 - 1:04 pm
We’ll lighten up once you quit with the inaccurate accusations or admit they are inaccurate OR post sources for your info that we can counter or pick apart.
For general life (not dealing with you) I’m pretty lightened up. Your charges are serious. So lighten up and stop making serious charges
Comment by Baklava @ 1/26/2006 - 1:12 pm
Why is it in liberals eyes it is always the unethical things the United States Government did or has done, so I guess the Soviet Union or China were victimized by the U.S.. Those communist countries were just sitting peacefully when the unethical U.S. came along and started taking over other countries and forcing our way of life on them. If you libs can not read about history there is the history channel they have pictures and commentators. It is typical of liberals to spew a bunch of Bull Sh#t and when called on it they will say “Hey man lighten up” or “Can’t we all just get along”.
Comment by Jim M @ 1/26/2006 - 1:36 pm
tommy, maybe we’d lighten up if you weren’t so negative and WRONG!!!
Comment by PCD @ 1/26/2006 - 1:57 pm
This may or may not be true.
Has anyone ever seen a copy of this newspaper? An actual copy.
The NY Sun in my opinion is no more news than us bloggers exchanging ideas and POV’s.
NY has about 11 million people. This publication circulates on the web and other media to under 200,000.
Nobody reads this paper. They’re just not credible. They are not journalist.
Don’t believe me? Ask a New Yorker if they have ever heard of this publication.
Comment by GBA @ 1/26/2006 - 2:15 pm
oh yes so what if syria has WMD? HE HAVE MORE, Get what i mean? and also remember evil is in all of us.
see it for what it is!
Comment by Fred Dawes @ 1/26/2006 - 2:23 pm
GBA, I have no respect for so-called journalists. Most of them are propagandists looking to get a name Republican removed from office so they can move up in the MSM.
Now, if the Sun is roporting facts that can be verified, they have more credibility than CBS and veteran reporter Dan Rather.
Comment by PCD @ 1/26/2006 - 2:32 pm
We should believe what he says. We believe what the saddam regime tells us. Just like if he said before the war that there were no WMD’s and they were in Syria we would believe him and not invade Iraq.
Comment by andrew @ 1/26/2006 - 3:02 pm
andrew, Be nice, PCD. –ST
Comment by PCD @ 1/26/2006 - 3:24 pm
“The UN Inspectors were the keystone cops of the Middle East ”
Except they’re about the only people that were right on the WMD issue.
Comment by andrew @ 1/26/2006 - 5:02 pm
And then the little green three toed men drove off on a cushion of air. Peace
Comment by steve @ 1/26/2006 - 7:13 pm
How were they right andrew? They claimed there were none when they did not have full access to Iraq. They found evidence from 91 and prior, but no evidence from when they were there in 98′. Where did the dismantled equipment go?
Comment by Pam @ 1/26/2006 - 7:34 pm
” They claimed there were none when they did not have full access to Iraq.”
And we claimed they were ther when we did not have full access. And who was right?
Comment by andrew @ 1/26/2006 - 11:58 pm
Andrew, It wasn’t just the U.S. intelligence that claimed they were there. It was British, French, German and Russian intelligence. And Saddam used them. And he has had to dismantle a bunch. Where did the rest go. Probably to Syria. Do you have a problem with that theory?
Andrew wrote, “Except they’re about the only people that were right on the WMD issue.
Blix wanted more time. That’s what he was saying. All of the other inspectors except for one who hadn’t been an inspector for awhile (Ritter) were mum on that topic. Please link for us a story where someone besides Ritter (who got paid by Saddam) actually said what you are saying they said Andrew.
Comment by Baklava @ 1/27/2006 - 7:45 am
Jim M wrote:
Because we are wealthy and powerful, and they’re ashamed of that fact.
They have the option, of course, of giving away all of their filthy lucre, but for some reason that doesn’t seem to happen.
Comment by Dana @ 1/27/2006 - 8:49 am
Baklava,
You are right and as I said to you in another post, I have theories as to what happened to the WMDs and at the right time would reveal my theories. Well, the subject has come up and the time is right.
Let me give a few facts and my theory and how I back it up.
First, UN weapons inspectors looking for WMDs in Iraq were hamstringed by the Iraq government. They had to get approval from the Iraqi government to inspect any site in and around Baghdad. Many times inspectors arrived at sites only to be blocked from entering until government “approval” was authorized. This usually took hours and sometimes days. If they UN weapons inspectors wanted to inspect sites outside the capital, they were flown by UN contracted helicopters. The UN had to get their flight plans approved at a minimum of 24 hours in advance. Of course the flight plan tells you where the flight is going. So as you see, a “surprise” inspection was never going to happen and the Iraqis had ample time to move any WMDs and clean. The UN weapons inspectors only found what the Iraqis wanted them to find. They had to let them find somethings or nobody would have believed the inspection.
Now my theory is exactly what is the subject of the article. The Iraqis had plenty of time to move the weapons before we entered Iraq. This would not be the first time Saddam had sent weapons out of the country, expecting to be beaten in the fight but retain control of the country. He did the same thing with the bulk of his air force during the first Gulf War sending them to Iran. The problem with that plan is the Iranians said sure send them over but had no intention of ever sending them back. Iran still blames (rightfully so) Iraq for starting the Iran/Iraq war. Iran kept the planes as a down payment on war reparations.
No longer trusting the Iranians to return his weapons, Saddam knew he would be beaten during this war but still believed he would survive and remain in power. He and the Syrians had made up (Syria was part of the coalliton in the first Gulf War) and he decided to send his WMDs to Syria. I also believe Russia had a hand in it as well. They supplied Iraq with about 95% of their weapons to include WMDs (France supplies most of the rest). Russia also supplies Syria.
Now as to what’s in it for Syria? Well, if Saddam survives and remains in power, they return the weapons to Saddam, they have an ally, and they also have base weapons to increase their own stockpile of WMDs. If Saddam loses and is removed from power (as is the case), Syria now has increased its stockpile of ready made WMDs. Win, win for Syria.
Syria has also made the same offer to Iran and their nuclear technology and weapons should they either come under sanctions or are attacked. They have said the Iranians can move whatever technology to Syria prior to such events. Again that is a win, win for Syria.
I would like to explain how I came to these theories, I have recently retired from a 20 year career in the US Air Force flying reconnaissance/intelligence gathering aircraft to include the first Gulf War and Operation Southern Watch. So my theories are based on things I have actually seen and done.
Comment by US Vet @ 1/27/2006 - 9:27 am
Iraqi Air Force General Sada said Saddam moved the WMD to Syria. In the 18 month delay to start the war (18 months was some rush), Convoys of trucks were spotted by US satellites, JSTARS, and acknowledged in the MSM. Why is it so inconceivable that Syria has the WMD?
Comment by PCD @ 1/27/2006 - 9:31 am
Our intelligence had no idea that Hamas was going to get a landside victory in a landmass reight next door to Israel and you want us to believe that some general, with an ax to grind, says he saw the entire weapons system of Iraq moved to Syrian in a fleet of automobiles? You all can’t be serious? Peace
Comment by steve @ 1/27/2006 - 9:52 am
Since intelligence agencies go to great lengths to keep their sources and conclusions secret, I am surprised when anyone states something is known or unknown to the government.
However, if the President was caught off guard by the election results, he appeared to be adequately prepared to respond to questions from the press. This hardly fits with the view of poor intelligence.
Comment by omapian @ 1/27/2006 - 10:10 am
Note that what this general is saying also is directly in agreement with what several Russian intelligence agents have said, that they had helped Iraq implement plans to dismantle and move their WMD stockpiles and production assets.
I’ve seen documentation and photos out of Iraq that it just amazes me that the Bush admin hasn’t held up as proof. Why they aren’t is beyond me, I am not sure what game they are playing, if they are holding back info in order to put pressure on other countries or agencies by threatening to release info, or what. The mobile vans are one thing I’ve never been able to understand. These things are NOT designed to make hydrogen for weather balloons using fermentation. That’s an assinine way to go about getting hydrogen, particularly in as hydrocarbon rich a place as Iraq. Why they let people claim they were not mobile biolabs doesn’t make sense. I think the design is not a good one, and they probably would not have worked well if at all, but their purpose was as mobile growing vats for agents like anthrax, etc. The fact that the Iraqis bought a defective design just means they were bilked, not that the units were not intended for biolabs.
Comment by Severian @ 1/27/2006 - 10:25 am
steve, obtuse as always, and wrong as always.
Comment by PCD @ 1/27/2006 - 10:30 am
“Andrew, It wasn’t just the U.S. intelligence that claimed they were there. It was British, French, German and Russian intelligence. ”
That’s why I said that UNSCOM was the only people who were right — that means everyone else is wrong.
” Please link for us a story where someone besides Ritter (who got paid by Saddam) ”
Saddam’s generals got paid by saddam. Should we believe them?
Comment by andrew @ 1/27/2006 - 10:34 am
You failed Andrew to give us the link or the quote from UNSCOM. They weren’t saying (to my memory) what you are saying they said. They wanted more time.
Why would they want more time? To look for nothing?
Comment by Baklava @ 1/27/2006 - 11:14 am
“They wanted more time.”
That was the correct answer.
Comment by andrew @ 1/27/2006 - 2:58 pm
Before anyone gets too excited by the fact that UNSCOM didn’t “find” anything, that doesn’t mean that nothing was there to find. There’s ample evidence that the Iraqi’s dodged and pulled the wool over the eyes of the inspectors. If they were so thorough, why have at least 21 pieces of chemical ordnance already been found in Iraq? Gee, they sure were thorough werent’ they?
This whole issue is still open in my view. I firmly believe that Iraq did indeed have chem/bio weapons and the material and equipment to make more, and that these were spirited out of the country in our year and a half “race” to war.
At the very least, an honest and open minded person would still view the claim that no WMDs were there suspiciously. Unfortunately, we are beset by partisans who are willing to say anything to smear this current administration for partisan political reasons.
Comment by Severian @ 1/27/2006 - 3:20 pm
Severian,
I remember UNSCOM stating that the vast majority of WMD were verifiably dismantled and destroyed. I am almost positive that almost 95% of Iraqs stockpile was accounted for. The rest Saddam said he destroyed. And they have never been found or accounted for.
The Swede they (UN) sent attested the same and then quit when the US corupted UNSCOM with CIA operatives. His successor Scott Ritter said the same thing. He also ultimately quit too stating disruption by the CIA made it impossible to perform their duties. It was both of their contentions that the CIA was as much an impedement to disarming Iraq as Saddam and Tariq Aziz. The problem was the CIA got made early by the Iraqi Intelligence. But they refused to leave and Saddam refused to cooperate.
What is not widely known is that Iraq had a stockpile of conventional ordinance that was at the time significantly larger than the US.
This explains the rash of IED’s that having killing and mutilating or troops.
Comment by GBA @ 1/27/2006 - 3:41 pm
GBA, your source? None of this was on the MSM.
Comment by PCD @ 1/27/2006 - 3:49 pm
I can get you video if you like.
Give me till tomorrow.
Put aside about an hour to watch the interviews. Unfortunately you have to trudge through all the parts of dying children that were exposed depleted uranium from US ordinance. Some of them have their skin literally melting from radiation sickness. Listen to the numbers.
It’s all true. It’s not a big deal.
Scott Ritter even wrote a book about it.
The point being was that whatever weapons are missing or unaccounted for are small in number and that will make them difficult to find .
Besides you said you have no respect for journalism. So what’s with your MSM issue?
This was on all the European, Asian, Arab and African networks.
Do you really think you get unfiltered news here in the states?
Comment by GBA @ 1/27/2006 - 4:01 pm
UNSCOM stated that the majority of what they knew or thought existed at the time the inspectors were originally expelled was destroyed. That doesn’t cover additional material that may have been manufactured, and really doesn’t speak to that which they knew existed (the “5%”) which the oh so honest Iraqi’s claimed to have destroyed. The whole UNSCOM inspection regime was such a complete and total farce Saddam could have had enough sarin to kill everyone in China and they wouldn’t have found it. Many of UNSCOMs inspectors were more interested in proving the US wrong than actually doing their job, and Scott Ritter has proven himself to be easily bought and has no credibilty. Neither does Blix in my view.
The whole inspection program was a massive joke. Give them plenty of warning, show up, get locked out while they could see trucks leaving by the back gate, tables full of documents that were used to obscure more than to inform, presses of Iraqi’s thonging around the tables full of documents whenever they started to look at them, shifting things around, etc. etc. ad nauseum. It figures that a corrupt, decadent, and useless organization like the UN would consider that an “effective” inspection program.
I’ve lost the links, but there have been numerous articles by members of the inspection teams documenting the nefarious things the Iraqi’s did to thwart the inspections, but they don’t get repeated often by the MSM, for obvious reasons.
I have numerous reasons for believing that Iraq did have WMD, and that they are in Syria or other countries at present. And you’re right, Iraq did have more conventional munitions than you could shake a stick at. If they surprised us on that account, I don’t believe it should be a surprise to consider that that they pulled the wool over the eyes of the inspectors on WMDs. One issue that’s not gotten the press it should have is the widespread murder of Iraqi scientists and engineers that has occured in Iraq after the war. These are the people who know the truth, someone is killing them, and I doubt it’s the US. Many of them have admitted to having stored material and documents in their homes to hide them from the inspectors. What else might have they been able to tell us if they were still alive?
Comment by Severian @ 1/27/2006 - 4:08 pm
“Unfortunately you have to trudge through all the parts of dying children that were exposed depleted uranium from US ordinance. Some of them have their skin literally melting from radiation sickness. Listen to the numbers.”
Oh, what a load of happy horsesh!t that is! If this is what you are using as an example of a rational, honest assessment of the WMDs in Iraq, that’s like reading Code Pink’s web site for pro-war issues!
There isn’t enough radioactivity in an entire army worth of M1 anti-tank rounds to cause someones skin to melt off! This is just more of the anti-US, anti-War hysteria promoted by the extremists in Europe and around the world (sadly, including the US). I’ve worked around depeleted uranium for several years, no cancer, no illness, and my skin is still attached. The same idiots who claimed that they had proof that the US used white phosporus on civilians because they’d found people with their clothes intact who looked like they’d been burned! WP will NOT spare clothes. The bodies they showed had not been exposed to WP, they had been killed in a rather normal and undistinguished manner, and had started to decay under the intense heat. I’ve seen my share of decayed bodies unfortunately, and nothing they showed looked abnormal to me. But, hey, what’s a little thing like facts and honesty when you’re on the good fight against the Evil Empire of GWBush eh?
Sheese, the things people believe and hold up as proof these days.
Comment by Severian @ 1/27/2006 - 4:16 pm
Severian,
It is not my contention that Iraq wasn’t in posession of contraband weaponry. But instead that we had a very good idea of what he had because he bought the WMD from the United States.
No disagreement from me on the accounting of said weaponry.
But here’s a consideration. Bio-weapons have a short shelf life unles constantly incubated. And Chem-weapons have a longer life but it’s much more finite than say HMX.
And the Iraqi’s working for Aziz were total mother%^(**rs. You’re absolutely right.CIA guys dressed as inspectors didn’t help either.
Comment by GBA @ 1/27/2006 - 5:02 pm
Severian,
It’s just a video. I didn’t film it. I am just telling you about it.
Don’t kill the messenger.
Comment by GBA @ 1/27/2006 - 5:03 pm
Severian,
DU is a different animal when it’s launched via Sabot. It’s very efective at killing armor. But you better believe that when you disperse high velocity atomized radioactive material.it’s a nasty situation.
Uranium is pretty safe until you hurl at high speed.
Comment by GBA @ 1/27/2006 - 5:08 pm
GBA, I know all about depleted uranium, and it’s real, as opposed to imaginary, hazards. I’ve been involved in working on weapon system design and testing for over 26 years, and the BS they are feeding you is just that, total BS. They take US regs regarding DU, that are, as most military safety regs are, grossly conservative, and extrapolate from them to imply that the substance is hideously dangerous. If I applied their same reasoning and hyperbolic extrapolation to, say, aspirin, then I’d be telling you that there were children bleeding to death because of aspirin residue on bottles they were playing with, as we all know aspirin thins the blood.
The people who are promoting this anti-DU hysteria have one, and only one, agenda, and it’s anti-US, because by and large it’s the US that uses DU munitions. Russia never got that many of them (prefering to use tungsten), and the Brits and other Europeans haven’t been involved in enough combat to have spread them around much.
And where in the world do you get the idea that the US sold WMD to Iraq? The ONLY thing I’ve ever seen about that that held any water was that Saddam’s biological people had ordered samples of various biological agents from the various US agencies that supply samples for research. There are labs in the US that can supply anthrax, as well as a variety of molds and other samples, that are used to test antibiotics, do genetic testing, provide samples to test mold resistance of materials and paints, etc. Some idiots got ahold of these lists and tried to make a case that the US had deliberately sold Saddam biowar materials, which is also another huge crock.
Comment by Severian @ 1/27/2006 - 5:25 pm
Severian,
I am sorry. My bad.
It was my mistake to think toxic waste was dangerous. Now I know better thanks to you. I am eternally grateful for your correction in the matter.
Comment by GBA @ 1/29/2006 - 4:37 pm
GBA, pretty petty, pitiful, and pathetic attempt at sarcasm. If you don’t want to know the reality and facts of the world, it’s not my fault. Perhaps you’d find the people at DU more to your taste?
And the left wonders why we don’t respect their views…
Comment by Severian @ 1/29/2006 - 5:49 pm
Severian,
Sorry you can’t accept my gratitude. I have obviously been spending too much time at globalsecurity.org.
I now suspect that those veterans from Gulf War 91′ are total liars about there claims too. I suppose they are also traitors for serving their country only to come home to pretend to be sick.
I guess not all vets are as brave and a knowledgeable as you. I used to think vets were honest until you proved me wrong with your insightful details about how safe depleted uranium really is.
It’s good to know that “Gulf War Syndrome” is nothing but a total lie fabricated by evil left wing veterans.
By the way and not by and large the United States is currently this only country in history to use depleted uranium against targets in civilian populated areas. And currently is also the only military on the planet to use DU at all. So if I applied your same reasoning and hyperbolic extrapolation to say being an anti-US sentiment that would also be true because no other military uses toxic waste as a weapon against human beings other than the United States.
Hey listen man. My brother is stationed in Dayton. Before that he was at Kirtland. And before that Los Alamos. And before that he was at Livermore. I get most of my questions answered from him regarding physics.
We all appreciate your sense of patriotic duty. But would you let your kids play with depleted uranium? Would you tell your mother it’s good for her?
I know you’re one of those guys who think our government is infoulable and completely righteous in every endeavor. I wish I had your sense of unquestioning faith and resolve. But I don’t.
Comment by GBA @ 1/30/2006 - 1:48 am