Problem with that CIA report is an actual former UN weapons inspector, John Ritter, disagrees with those conclusions. He was there. I've never been there, so I don't really know. Given that Ritter thinks Saddam is a tryant and perhaps should be overthrown, I think it at least makes sense to juxtraposition his opinion into something at least worthy of consideration. And, by the way, I, too, think Saddam is a tyrant and perhaps should be overthrown--but by Iraqi people who haven't been paid to do so by the CIA.
Regarding the CIA, in my view, just 'cause the CIA says it's so, or a particular politician says it's so, I'm not necessarily gonna believe it. There's been too much disinformation from behavior of past administrations. I've further gotta admit that watching some of the news reports on television sorta gives me a vibe we're not getting the full picture.
And there's also a moral consideration here. If the US gave Iraq its WMD capability due to the convenience of the Iran vs. Iraq War, should not the US share in the complicity of the problem?
And I've gotta admit I'm also curious as to why Iraq, a top three holder of oil reserves, has been unable for the past 18 years to become a top three oil producer and exporter. So I guess I've gotta conclude that oil and WDM don't mix well with spilling innocent American and Iraqi blood. If the bloodshed gambit is played, I wanna know it's for a sure reason and not a maybe reason. Don't you? |
