You are quite wrong. Here is an even- handed piece from the Council on Foreign Relations:
Iraq
Has Iraq sponsored terrorism?
Yes. Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship provided headquarters, operating bases, training camps, and other support to terrorist groups fighting the governments of neighboring Turkey and Iran, as well as to hard-line Palestinian groups. During the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam commissioned several failed terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities. The State Department lists Iraq as a state sponsor of terrorism. The question of Iraq’s link to terrorism grew more urgent with Saddam’s suspected determination to develop weapons of mass destruction, which Bush administration officials feared he might share with terrorists who could launch devastating attacks against the United States.
Was Saddam involved in the September 11 attacks?
There is no hard evidence linking Saddam to the attacks, and Iraq denies involvement. Many commentators noted that Baghdad failed to express sympathy for the United States after the attacks.
Does Iraq have ties with al-Qaeda?
The Bush administration insists that hatred of America has driven the two closer together, although many experts say there’s no solid proof of such links and argue that the Islamist al-Qaeda and Saddam’s secular dictatorship would be unlikely allies.
What evidence does the administration offer?
Some Iraqi militants trained in Taliban-run Afghanistan helped Ansar al-Islam, an Islamist militia based in a lawless part of northeast Iraq. The camps of Ansar fighters, who clashed repeatedly with anti-Saddam Kurds, were bombed in the early days of Operation Iraqi Freedom. In February 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell told the U.N. Security Council that Iraq was harboring a terrorist cell led by Abu Musab Zarqawi, a suspected al-Qaeda affiliate and chemical and biological weapons specialist. Powell said al-Zarqawi had both planned the October 2002 assassination of a U.S. diplomat in Jordan and set up a camp in Ansar al-Islam’s territory to train terrorists in the use of chemical weapons. Powell added that senior Iraqi and al-Qaeda leaders had met at least eight times since the early 1990s.
Czech officials have also reported that Muhammad Atta, one of the September 11 ringleaders, met an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague months before the hijackings, but U.S. and Czech officials subsequently cast doubt on whether such a meeting ever happened. Al-Qaeda members fleeing Afghanistan have reportedly hid in northern Iraq, but in areas beyond Saddam’s control.
What type of terrorist groups has Iraq supported?
Primarily groups that can hurt Saddam’s regional foes. Saddam has aided the Iranian dissident group Mujahedeen-e-Khalq and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (known by its Turkish initials, PKK), a separatist group fighting the Turkish government. Moreover, Iraq has hosted several Palestinian splinter groups that oppose peace with Israel, including the mercenary Abu Nidal Organization, whose leader, Abu Nidal, was found dead in Baghdad in August 2002. Iraq has also supported the Islamist Hamas movement and reportedly channeled money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. A secular dictator, Saddam tended to support secular terrorist groups rather than Islamists such as al-Qaeda, experts say.
Have U.S.-Iraq relations always been hostile?
No. In the 1980s, following the Iranian revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis in Tehran, the United States saw Saddam as a useful regional counterweight to the Ayatollah Khomeini. Indeed, when Iraq launched a long, brutal war against Iran in 1980, the Reagan administration provided Saddam’s regime with arms, funds, and support.
When did relations sour?
U.S.-Iraq relations ruptured in August 1990, when Iraq invaded its tiny, oil-rich neighbor of Kuwait. That prompted the United Nations to impose economic sanctions and eventually authorize war. In the winter of 1991, a U.S.-led coalition drove Iraq out of Kuwait but stopped short of ousting Saddam. After the war, the U.N. Security Council maintained economic sanctions on Iraq; established two “no-fly” zones patrolled by U.S. and British planes to protect Kurds in the north and Shiites in the south; and imposed international weapons inspections to prevent Saddam from rebuilding his arsenals of weapons of mass destruction.
The Clinton administration sought to contain Saddam with a mixture of sanctions and arms inspections but ultimately concluded that Saddam had to go., Bush administration officials took up the anti-Saddam cause, especially after 9/11. Officials characterized Saddam’s regime as an immediate threat to America—because of its history of attacking its neighbors, using chemical weapons, supporting terrorist groups, defying U.N. Security Council resolutions, and seeking to acquire nuclear weapons. In his first State of the Union address after September 11, President Bush said Iraq belonged to an “axis of evil.”
Has Iraq ever used weapons of mass destruction?
Yes. In the 1980s Iran-Iraq War, Iraqi troops repeatedly used poison gas, including mustard gas and the nerve agent sarin, against Iranian soldiers. Iranian officials also accuse Iraq of dropping mustard-gas bombs on Iranian villages. Human Rights Watch reports that Iraq frequently used nerve agents and mustard gas against Iraqi Kurds living in the country’s north. In March 1988, Saddam’s forces reportedly killed thousands of Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja with chemical weapons.
Did Iraq use weapons of mass destruction in the Gulf War?
No. During the Gulf War, Iraq fitted 25 Scud missiles with warheads that could deliver anthrax or other germs and prepared bombs and aerial sprayers that could be used in biowarfare. But Iraq never used them—perhaps because U.S. officials had warned that such an attack would have devastating consequences.
Does Iraq have weapons of mass destruction?
Probably, although we don’t know what. That’s because throughout the 1990s, Saddam resisted the U.N. weapons inspections mandated by the Gulf War cease-fire. Former U.N. weapons inspectors and other Iraq watchers think that Iraq certainly has chemical weapons, probably has biological weapons, and is working to get nuclear weapons.
At the end of the Gulf War, Iraq agreed to dismantle its extensive chemical and biological weapons programs and destroy its stockpiles of sarin, VX, mustard gas, anthrax, botulinum toxin, and other deadly agents. Many experts suspect it squirreled some of these weapons away. In the mid-1990s, defectors’ disclosures and U.N. inspections forced Iraq to admit that it had restarted its chemical and biological weapons programs. A round of intrusive inspections in late 2002 and early 2003 turned up no conclusive proof of large arsenals of weapons of mass destruction.
Still, some U.N. inspectors say that it would take Saddam a matter of weeks or months to restart full-scale production of deadly gases, and U.S. officials say Iraq has built biological weapons laboratories that are mobile, subterranean, or housed in nonmilitary factories.
Does Iraq have nuclear weapons?
We don’t know, but Saddam has tried for decades to get a nuclear bomb. His atomic ambitions were set back for years in 1981, when the Israeli Air Force destroyed a nuclear reactor at Osiraq, outside Baghdad. In 1996, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iraq had all the materials for a bomb except for the fissile material itself—either plutonium or highly enriched uranium. The head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, told the U.N. Security Council on March 7 that the most recent round of inspections had produced “no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq.”
How might Iraq deliver chemical or biological weapons?
Most experts think that Iraq still has a small stockpile of Scud missiles that can be fitted with germ or chemical warheads. Scuds are not that accurate and can’t reach the United States, but Saddam could try to use them to bombard Israel or Saudi Arabia. Other ways to spread deadly germs or gases include shorter-range rockets, artillery shells, unmanned low-flying drones, and sprayers mounted on fighter jets or helicopters. Moreover, Iraq could pass deadly agents to terrorists, who could use them against civilians.
Could Iraq give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists?
Perhaps. Bush administration officials cite this fear as one principal reason to topple Saddam, before he gets nuclear weapons. But some experts doubt that even Saddam would be reckless enough to pass doomsday weapons on to terrorists.
Is there a consensus on targeting Iraq as part of the U.S.-led war on terrorism?
No. Some U.S. officials argue that any serious campaign against global terrorism should treat Iraq as a top priority; they say that Saddam’s belligerent history, deadly arsenals, and support of terrorism make him an immediate menace, and that the United States had to act before Saddam got a nuclear bomb.
Others argue that there’s no clear connection between Saddam and September 11 and that containing Saddam has been effective and is less risky than an invasion, which could provoke regional instability or Iraqi attacks on Israel, Kuwait, or Saudi Arabia. Still others say the U.S.-led invasion to disarm Iraq sets a worrisome international precedent and that Iraq is a distraction from the real menace to American lives, the battered but still active al-Qaeda network.
Do many other countries support an invasion of Iraq?
No. The issue has bitterly divided the United Nations Security Council. While most of the world would be happy to be rid of Saddam, most foreign leaders don’t see Iraq as a clear and present danger or the logical next step in the fight against global terrorism. Since the end of the first Gulf War, U.S. policies on Iraq, especially the continued economic sanctions, have been widely unpopular in Europe and in the Arab and Muslim world. In the run-up to the 2003 war in Iraq, most European leaders, other than British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Spanish counterpart, Jose Maria Aznar, advocated containment, or at least giving U.N. weapons inspections more time.
terrorismanswers.com |
