These are my random musings. Hopefully they will be witty, insightful, and frequently updated.
Disproving Iraq invasion 'evidence' off the top of my head
Published on February 3, 2006 By singrdave In War on Terror
Found this article at the Independent.co.uk:

It is complete garbage, and I'll tell you why after the article.



George Bush considered provoking a war with Saddam Hussein's regime by flying a United States spyplane over Iraq bearing UN colours, enticing the Iraqis to take a shot at it, according to a leaked memo of a meeting between the US President and Tony Blair.

The two leaders were worried by the lack of hard evidence that Saddam Hussein had broken UN resolutions, though privately they were convinced that he had. According to the memorandum, Mr Bush said: "The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach."

The memo damningly suggests the decision to invade Iraq had already been made when Mr Blair and the US President met in Washington on 31 January 2003 ­ when the British Government was still working on obtaining a second UN resolution to legitimise the conflict.

The leaders discussed the prospects for a second resolution, but Mr Bush said: "The US would put its full weight behind efforts to get another resolution and would 'twist arms' and 'even threaten'. But he had to say that if ultimately we failed, military action would follow anyway." He added that he had a date, 10 March, pencilled in for the start of military action. The war actually began on 20 March.

Mr Blair replied that he was "solidly with the President and ready to do whatever it took to disarm Saddam." But he also insisted that " a second Security Council resolution would provide an insurance policy against the unexpected, and international cover, including with the Arabs" .


This is complete and utter bullcrap. I can say this with a great degree of certainty, for the following reasons:



1. A U2 aircraft flies far above the limit of a surface-to-air or air defense missile. 70,000 feet (approx.) is a long way for a targeting computer or a missile.

2. You can't see the "UN Colors" of a U2 aircraft, especially from the ground. If you can see anything at all, it's a streak of contrail. Again with the 70,000 feet... you'd have to be the Six-Million Dollar Man to view the flag on the side of a U2.

3. Saddam's air defense had been taking potshots at Operation Northern Watch and Southern Watch aircraft for many many years. If the "coalition of the willing" was trying to make a case based on Saddam firing one missile at one plane, then they could have invaded in 1994.

Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Feb 05, 2006
as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed


if only they'd had sense enuff to transport them in u2s which fly "far above the limit of a surface-to-air or air defense missile. 70,000 feet (approx.) is a long way for a targeting computer or a missile"
on Feb 05, 2006
drmiler

You are DEAD WRONG. Only through the U N is such action authorized. Each member DOES NOT have the authority to act FOR the UN. You ignorance has nothing to do with you being enlisted you just do not know what you are talking about! The way Bush and Cheney got the war resolution passed is by making people believe Saddam was a threat and the major element was a nuclear program that did not exist. The Cheney mushroom cloud was all BS. Bush was told that was not correct by the CIA, Dept of Energy and DSA. He did not listen because to do so would have prevented him from invading Iraq.


Hey clown...that is NOT what I said. "If" your nation sits on the security council (which we do) sooner or later you will need to back up the UN with your military. And Saddam being a threat? Only in your closed mind was that buffoon not a threat to anyone.
on Feb 05, 2006
The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.


For all those that said/say there were no WMD's. This person who was right there says you're wrong.


I'm sure this guy is the epitome of credibility. At this point I'm sure he'll say anything to save his ass. And of course, if he says he was "right there" he must have been. The honchos of Saddam's regime were sooo honorable.


I'm not saying this guy is the absolute truth. However as the #2 in command of Saddam's airforce...if it did happen, I would say he more than likely was "right there". And saying this is "not" going to save his butt.
on Feb 05, 2006
And saying this is "not" going to save his butt.


Yes, I'm pretty sure there would be a lot of people "in high places" that would look very favorably on a high ranking official making a stement like that.
on Feb 05, 2006
drmiler

We are one of 15 members on the Security Council. That DOES NOT give us the right to act FOR the UN and enforce its resolutions.

You are a GRUNT.
on Feb 05, 2006

I'm sure this guy is the epitome of credibility. At this point I'm sure he'll say anything to save his ass. And of course, if he says he was "right there" he must have been. The honchos of Saddam's regime were sooo honorable.

He has more credibility than Wilson and all the others saying there were never any.  SInce we know there were some!

on Feb 05, 2006
Dr Guy

The bottom line is that even if Saddam had some gas or other WMD, he did not pose ANY danger to the United States. He had no way to use it against us and if he had the means and had used it against us, it knew that would have been the end of his dictatorship. The assertion that Saddam, even with some WMD, was a danger was a lie! All that was to get Congress to allow Bush to invade Iraq which was his plan from January 2001.
on Feb 05, 2006
He has more credibility than Wilson and all the others saying there were never any.


Wilson never claimed that there weren't WMD's there at some point. If you have a quote from him on this I'd love to see it.
on Feb 05, 2006
Boy, go inactive from the blog for a few days and watch how the topic drives mightily out of control!
COL Gene:
All that was to get Congress to allow Bush to invade Iraq which was his plan from January 2001.

Oh, COL, do we have to go over this again? The only reason you're saying that Bush's January 2001 agenda was from the now-discredited Paul O'Neill book. O'Neill had an axe to grind; he has about as much credibility in my mind as James Frey, the recently-outed author of crap... I mean, "A Million Little Pieces". I thought we'd discussed this ad nauseum months ago.

Kingbee:
and yet the russians managed to do just that back on may 1, 1960 as did cuba on october 27, 1962.

The downing of the U2 in the USSR has been the subject of much debate over the years.
From About.com:
By 1960, the U.S. had flown numerous 'successful' missions over and around the U.S.S.R. However, a major incident was about to occur. On May 1, 1960, a U-2 spy plane piloted by Francis Gary Powers was brought down near Svedlovsk, Soviet Union. This event had a lasting negative impact on U.S. - U.S.S.R. relations. The details surrounding this event are to this day still shrouded in mystery.

Mysteries:
The conventional story given to explain the crash of the U-2 and the subsequent capture of Gary Powers is that a surface-to-air missile brought down the plane. However, the U-2 spy plane was constructed to be unassailable by conventional weapons. The major benefit of these high altitude planes was their ability to stay above enemy fire.

If the plane was flying at its proper height and had been shot down, many question how Powers could have survived. It would have been very likely that he would have died in the explosion or from the high altitude ejection. Therefore, many individuals question the validity of this explanation. Several alternative theories have been put forward to explain the downing of Gary Powers spy plane:

1. Gary Powers was flying his plane below the high flying reconnaissance altitude and was hit by anti-aircraft fire.
2. Gary Powers actually landed the plane in the Soviet Union.
3. There was a bomb on board the plane.

The newest and probably least probable explanation offered for the downing of the planes comes from the pilot of a Soviet plane involved in the incident.


So the USSR's air defense was not necessarily the good shots they claimed they were.
2 Pages1 2