Friday, October 08, 2004
Which part of "wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability" don't you understand?
Predictably, the media is in a state of "BUSH LIED!!!!!!" frenzy following the release of the Iraq Survey Group report on Weapons of Mass Destruction. In a world of never-ending spin and bias it would be nice to expect that at least our papers would not resort to printing statements purporting to be reporting but which in reality are outrightly and demonstrably false. I'm sure we can each point to an example from our local newspaper, and here's one from mine; Brisbane "Courier Mail":
As I've written before, I can't imagine a better strategic decision than to remove from power someone who's nearly succeeded in conning the world (most of the world, of course, wanted to be conned, didn't care if they were, or worse still, weren't conned but pretended they were) with his "reformed WMDholic" act, and was about to return to his bad old habits as soon as the world's gaze was off him again. Hey, but that's just me, a crazy neo-con tapping into collective Polish memory of what happens if you allow a nasty piece of work to re-arm at leisure while hoping that international institutions and rationality will prevail.
|
"Saddam Hussein was not a threat when the US led the invasion of Iraq, America's top weapons inspector has found...This is not a misrepresentation or misreading - this is nonreading of Duelfer's work. Never mind the actual rich contents of the report; you don't need to go further than page 1 of "Key Findings" to read:
"Iraq had no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons when the war began on March 19, 2003, and no plans to build any."
"Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed in 1991—after sanctions were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but probably with a different mix of capabilities to that which previously existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities."Yet the media keeps getting away with it.
As I've written before, I can't imagine a better strategic decision than to remove from power someone who's nearly succeeded in conning the world (most of the world, of course, wanted to be conned, didn't care if they were, or worse still, weren't conned but pretended they were) with his "reformed WMDholic" act, and was about to return to his bad old habits as soon as the world's gaze was off him again. Hey, but that's just me, a crazy neo-con tapping into collective Polish memory of what happens if you allow a nasty piece of work to re-arm at leisure while hoping that international institutions and rationality will prevail.
|
