Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Almost done...

With the book previously mentioned. I don't think that it is going to win any literary awards, however, it has been worth the read. ( by this, i only mean that it is written as a narrative of the events of the authors life, and that there is much repitition in the story telling, and so it feels like you jump around in time alot-- not surprising for a man who is a Air Force General by trade and not an author.) It confirms what any thinking person would guess. That saddam had, used, and hid WMD's of chemical, biological natures, and that he was ardently persuing Nuclear weapons and would not have hesitated to use them had he gotten them. Also, that the commanders of the troops going in to baghdad were advised to handle things differently... in a way that the author believes would have not swelled the ranks of the insurgency. It was also revealed (to me, maybe everyone else knew this) that saddam was offered a way out by those looking to make peace. Saddam was offered the chance to take all the wealth, family and friends he wanted and be able to live comfortably in his choice of 3 different asian countries, and in exchange, he would have to leave Iraq. He never even answered the peace negotiators. When asked by an officer if war could be avoided with the US a second time, Saddam said "No, the price is too high." - A response not understood at the time it was asked. The "price" of course was his pride. There are reports that an even later offer by the UAE for asylum was offered and nearly accepted, but the war had already begun and it was too late.
So many people ask, Why Iraq? why not Sudan or North Korea? Well, I don't know what the dictators are like in these countries, but I do know that Saddam has instigated war with Iran, Invaded Kuwait, Fired Scuds on Israel (he wanted to strike Israel with chemical WMD's but we crippled him so quickly in 91 that he couldn't do it.) besides using WMDs on his own people.
People ask, Why didn't we find WMDs? Aparently, a natural disaster in syria shortly before the war allowed Saddam to fly comercial planes loaded with weapons and drive trucks supposed to have aid but laiden with chemical weapons into syria. The Baath party in syria agreeing to hold onto them until needed. The author is just as surprised that no one has spoken out about this yet. I suspect that the US administration wants tangible proof before playing their next hand.
As for me, I belive the testimony of these witnesses. If I am wrong, I have belived a liar. Time will hopefully tell.

3 Comments:

Blogger Chuck Wade said...

I have to say, if you watched the argument that Colin Powell gave to the U.N., then you know that there was some pretty strong evidence for the WMDs. I'll have to check out this book though, sounds like a good one.

8:15 AM  
Blogger Kevin said...

There is a problem in the media. It may be a longstanding one but I've only really become aware of it recently. It is this: if you say something enough times, it's true. The best example I can think of was in the case of the DC sniper. No actual witnesses described a white van as a getaway vehicle to the police. One lied about it but soon confessed. Yet for weeks, police (police mind you, the ones who should know) were stopping white vans. Because the media said that a witness spotted a white van, and said it enough times. News follows news and it was everywhere. Said by everyone, verified by no one.

There has been so much talk about their being no evidence for WMDs that people start assuming it's true. It has to be, so many people are saying it.

Now I'm not a huge cynic. I still say that a large number of people verifying something remains a decent method for obtaining truth. I don't like to have to be my own investigative journalist in order to get the truth. I like to believe what I see on the news. Now it's all getting ruined. A dart to ratings hungry news whores. A pat to those who bother to find the truth before publishing it.

11:49 AM  
Blogger Incredibly Fat Man said...

On the other hand, the Bush admin hasn't exactly done itself any favors. Why haven't they mentioned any of this? Or the 40+ cannisters of sarin gas (capable of killing around half a million people) that were found right at the beginning of the war?

I am constantly baffled by the PR this admin does. When they decisions that are obviously mistakes in hindsight, they stubbornly stand by them. When they have clear evidence to support their side, they change the subject. The first time I heard Bush take straight up responsibility for something was after Katrina....something that totally and completely in no way his fault.

Baffling.

9:15 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home