"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...


Why bother with appearances, when the entire plan was designed with
absolutely no consideration for our image in the world?

Because the administration gave the French and Russians a chance to atone
for their sins of sending banned arms to Saddam. As the Oil-for-food
scandal unfurled, it became evident that neither of those two countries
would have budged and inch no matter what we negotiated.

I don't buy it, but that's just how I am.



So, please, cut the crap. If there were WMDs, your president wanted
them gone. Use your imagination and you can figure out the reasons.
I'll admit there may have been just ONE good reason to allow them to
be smuggled out: To make the country a bit safer for our troops. But,
since your president can't arrange for vehicle armor, I doubt he
really cared much whether soldiers were exposed to chemical or
biological weapons.

I can think of another good reason to allow them to be smuggled out:
We weren't ready to militarily engage the Russians who were helping
Saddam sneak the WMD from his country to Syria.

Oh boy. You think there were frightening numbers of Russian soldiers
waiting for us?

No. And I never said that. But there were plenty of Russian soldiers
elsewhere in the world that we didn't want to drag into our fight in
Iraq.

Time out. If, theoretically, president Rove actually knew which trucks
were hauling stuff out of Iraq

You mean Russian trucks?
Don't you remember the report of us hitting a Russian convoy heading to
Syria (under the guise of a Diplomatic envoy)
just a few weeks after the invasion started?

If not, here is the report:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...nvoy.attacked/



We claimed that we had no forces in the area (special-ops always operates
that way), yet Condi Rice made
an emergency trip to Moscow the next day to smooth things over:
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/7133-3.cfm
(You can bet she was armed with "proof" of Russian involvement in the
evacuation of Iraqi WMD-related material and technology.)

The administration obviously worked out a deal with the Russians. They'd
shut up about US future involvement in Iraq (ironically, Putin practically
endorsed Bush right before the election), and we'd keep lids on the evidence
that we had accumulated.

It was working very well, until John A. Shaw spilled the beans right before
the election:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/natio...2637-6257r.htm

At the time that that story was released, the White House did not condone
(but did not criticize) Shaw, because the story was valuable for Bush's
re-election bid. But not long after the election, Shaw was dismissed...most
likely because the truth that he was spreading was interfering with our
on-going negotiations with the Russians regarding their planned shipment of
anti-aircraft missiles to Syria.
http://www.jeffbrokaw.net/notes/2005...ced-to-resign/