<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, January 12, 2005

Official WMD Search Ended `

It has been almost a year since Bush proceeded with the invasion of Iraq citing the imminent threat of Iraqi WMDs. The operation was executed by a body of hundreds of thousands of US military personnel, among whom some 1,350 have been killed and over 10,000 wounded. A part of this body is the 1,700-member force known as the Iraqi Survey Group, formally dedicated to uncovering the WMDs cited to justify their presence in Iraq (post facto). They've been looking this whole time, taking over for UNSCOM (while blocking their return to the country) and IAEA, augmented by the efforts of the CIA, NRO and Pentagon, which never stopped in the first place.

You know, I know, and by gum, now these blokes do, too. It's official: Iraq had no WMDs.
"Charles Duelfer, the CIA special adviser who led the ISG's weapons search, has returned home and is expected next month to issue a final addendum to his September report concluding that prewar Iraq had no WMD stockpiles, officials said."

Among the reasons they stopped physically searching is the risk to their safety in continued operations on the ground in Iraq. This doesn't speak well for the occupation either. Call me cynical, but I imagine that the US elections being over also helps.

More interesting as a point of news, Reuters reports from an unnamed defense official that "Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Joseph McMenamin was replaced last month as the ISG's military head by an officer of lesser rank... Air Force Col. Lloyd Somers is now serving as acting director of the ISG." It seems odd to replace the chief right before his job concludes and the final report is made. I would like to hear McMenamin's account before he leaves the scene altogether.

At the White House, folks had to admit the search may be over, but fear not. Scott McClellan's battle with reality goes on:
"McClellan insisted today that the war was justified. He rejected the suggestion
that the administration's credibility had been gravely wounded in ways that
could weaken its future response to perceived threats." (NYTimes)

Maybe he's right, inasmuch as you don't have to worry about gravely wounding your credibilty if you don't have any.
# posted by atz at 1/12/2005 05:54:00 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?