Larry Gude
Strung Out
I believe...
...the parts about compiling large numbers of bio war chemists and about being able to rapidly reconstitute bug programs. We knew darn well he wasn't very far along with any nuke program, for damn sure. Did he have parts? Was he in violation? Sure. This was a case of letting the facts, thin as they were, speaking loudly and denouncing anyone like Blix based on the facts that they did not know for sure, though they were the ones with first hand knowledge up to the latest kick out by Saddam.
This was no Gulf of Tonkin. It was, however, as thin as you could get and still call it gravy.
It's what Albright thought, what Clinton thought, what Bush was given as a turnover into the presidency, what the Russians told us, the English told us, and, as you state below, what Saddam told us. What part of it do you disagree with? We can all agree it was probably wrong (Syria is the only one who really knows if it was false from the beginning or not), but you have to agree it's what everybody THOUGHT.Your last is really a big part of the proof - we thought it, he helped us continue to think it. Powerfully. To his detriment.
...the parts about compiling large numbers of bio war chemists and about being able to rapidly reconstitute bug programs. We knew darn well he wasn't very far along with any nuke program, for damn sure. Did he have parts? Was he in violation? Sure. This was a case of letting the facts, thin as they were, speaking loudly and denouncing anyone like Blix based on the facts that they did not know for sure, though they were the ones with first hand knowledge up to the latest kick out by Saddam.
This was no Gulf of Tonkin. It was, however, as thin as you could get and still call it gravy.