I was watching Fox last night and heard a mideast analyst (Monsoor?) say that the US military had someone who could prove where the WMD are, but wanted Saddam captured before he would talk. He predicts that now that we got him, we will mine a lot of such information. In fact, he stated that before the state of the union address, we will have proof of biological, chemical and nuclear (not actual bombs, but components) WMD's. I will believe it when I see it, but it is interesting to ponder how many people in Iraq who have information withheld it for fear of retaliation against them or their families. How many will now come forward, and what information will we now learn? BTW, we arrested some of Iraq's top aides based on information on or from Saddam when we captured him (see DrudgeReport.com this morning (12/13)).
Has anyone heard anything tangible about the impact of Saddam's capture on WMD's? What about that memo that implicates Iraq in the training of Mohammed Atta, and establishes a definitive link between Iraq and Al Qaeda? If that is validated and WMD are found, will Hip and others acknowledge that Bush did not lie, but instead did the right thing?
I don't think that Sadam knows where the WMD are. Do you think that our Prez knows where ours are? I think that Sadam would have given the order to hide them and let the underlings do the job if there were any.
What I think that Sadam will be good for is info on who was sapose to do what and posibly where that person is at.
When the WMD are finally found in Iraq, there will be those that will proclaim that Bush had them planted there.....and of course it'll happen just before the election.....SURPRISE....
Realistically, I think any useful information will come from others who may talk now because they don't have to fear Saddam's return. Also, Iraqi people who were afraid of reprisal can now come forth and tell what they know, or point out the location of members of the resistance.
Any President has to make decisions based on the best intelligence they have at the time. If we don't find WMD, that doesn't mean they don't exist, while if we do find them, they do exist. In any case, intelligence may have been flawed, but Bush isn't to blame for using that best intelligence he had to make his decision to go to war. That is NOT LYING unless he knows the information is false! Furthermore, the onus was on Saddam to prove he destroyed what we knew he had in '98. 1441 said ZERO about the US proving he had WMD. Nevertheless, if we don't find WMD and I see proof that Bush knew Saddam didn't have WMD, something no democrat even questioned before the war, I will condemn him for using that as the reason to go to war.
There's been more than a few reports to suggest that a fairly large amount of the WMD are in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley, being guarded by 10,000 or so Hizballah guerillas, a couple of divisions of the Syrian army, and a division or two of the Iranian army. And, I heard that the Mossad went in and confirmed this, about the first week of August or so.
People will come forward now, now that Saddam isn't the one running the show anymore. Bet on it. And, I saw a report that was issued by the Iraqi Governing Council which states that they have documents proving that Mohammed Atta got some of his training for the 9/11 attacks in Baghdad. Unconfirmed, to be sure, but it's definitely possible.
Saddam's capture and finding WMD
