Does this mean Bush didn’t lie? Yes, I think it does. *UPDATED*

I’ve never believed Bush lied and, to the extent his information was incorrect (as was information in the hands of all other Western agencies and governments), I assumed that our spywork was to blame. Now we get confirmation of what’s been rumored forever — it was Saddam who lied, never suspecting that his bluff would be called, not by Iran, but by the US:

Saddam Hussein initially didn’t think the U.S. would invade Iraq to destroy weapons of mass destruction, so he kept the fact that he had none a secret to prevent an Iranian invasion he believed could happen. The Iraqi dictator revealed this thinking to George Piro, the FBI agent assigned to interrogate him after his capture.

[snip]

“He told me he initially miscalculated… President Bush’s intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998…a four-day aerial attack,” says Piro. “He survived that one and he was willing to accept that type of attack.” “He didn’t believe the U.S. would invade?” asks Pelley, “No, not initially,” answers Piro.

Once the invasion was certain, says Piro, Saddam asked his generals if they could hold the invaders for two weeks. “And at that point, it would go into what he called the secret war,” Piro tells Pelley. But Piro isn’t convinced that the insurgency was Saddam’s plan. “Well, he would like to take credit for the insurgency,” says Piro.

Saddam still wouldn’t admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there would be military action against him because of the perception he did. Because, says Piro, “For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that [faking having the weapons] would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq,” he tells Pelley.

You can read the rest of the article here and, of course, watch the 60 Minutes interview.

Incidentally, it’s also apparent from the interview that, even if Saddam didn’t have WMDs in 2003, he was plenty prepared to have them in future:

He also intended and had the wherewithal to restart the weapons program. “Saddam] still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there,” says Piro. “He wanted to pursue all of WMD…to reconstitute his entire WMD program.” This included chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, Piro says.

But do you think any of this will change of the minds of the Bush lied/people died crowd?

UPDATE: From SGT Dave’s comment to this post:

The only problem I have at this time is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, there were indeed chemical weapons in Iraq at the time of the invasion. We captured some while I was serving in Baghdad (the 500 “old” rounds) and had at least one shell used as an IED.

Saddam had all the physical machinery in place to start making chemical and biological weapons; he didn’t have the chemical precursors, but was seeking them. The same goes with radiological/nuclear weaponry. The only reason he didn’t have these items was lack of ways he could get money out of the country and into the hands of the dealers.

The bottom line remains that at least five tons of the chemical weapons reported destroyed by the UN inspectors were recovered by US forces; the mobile laboratory facilities reported destroyed by Iraq and the UN were captured in western Iraq during the opening days of the war; the Saddam regime attempted to purchase yellow-cake uranium for refining (despite C.Wilson’s false statements to the press – contradicting his sworn report) in a centrifuge array that was captured by US forces – again reported as destroyed by Iraq and the UN; and Saddam ordered items shipped to Syria (though the contents of those shipments is not known/releasable at this time).

The writing on the wall is just about as clear as the German redeployment of the Panzer divisions eastward into Poland. If not for the Germans’ own crazy leader interfering with the battle plan, the ignorance and arrogance of the Russian leader of the time nearly brought down an entire nation in a single campaign season. While Bush is no Churchill or Roosevelt, I fear that the other choices we were given would have given results in the range of Stalin or Chamberlain.
Wow, quite a rant – even for me.

Even now the literate and relatively knowledgable are falling prey to the spin. Don’t concede that there “weren’t” WMD – there were. Don’t even let them put out that there “wasn’t a significant amount” – enough agent to kill over a million people ten times over is quite a bit. They are lying now, as they were before, but they are lying about the lies that they told about the lies. Don’t give them the first step; they will keep lying until the truth is only known by those willing to dig into the classified and official “sworn” documents.

Don’t be a victim of Newspeak and Newthink. They’re lying to you.

UPDATE II: And more from SGT Dave, whose comments here are factual enough that they shouldn’t be buried:

Saddam was killing dozens every day in Baghdad, not to mention the “swamp Arabs” and the Kurds.

Training areas used to practice hijackings – including a set of four that killed about 3,000 Americans.

Mid-grade weaponized anthrax, enough to pollute an area the size of Kansas.

Enough sarin, VX, and mustard gas to kill every Shi’ite in Baghdad.

And I won’t go into the torture and rape rooms – it took days to get the images out of my nightmares.

Saddam may have been lying on some things, but you cannot take that kind of risk. I’m out here; I was there. The truth is that we didn’t do it because we “can”. We did it because the risk was too high regarding what he could have done. There is no defense in thousands of miles of sea any longer.

Maybe I’m a simple reactionary, but I believe it was worth the time I spent there. I have friends that still serve and believe it was worth it. You didn’t get to meet a young woman of my acquaintance, there in Mashtal in Baghdad. She didn’t have fingers on her left hand and her right leg didn’t work quite right anymore. When she was eight Uday thought she was very pretty playing in the schoolyard. She can’t ever have kids and was trembling when she took the aid bag from my hand, with food for her mother and sister. My counterpart with Civil Affairs and her female terp got the story of why she was scared of the big men in uniform.

I will never, ever, forget the look on that woman’s face and the fear those unspeakable individuals made manifest in her. If one – ONE – little girl in that place was spared this by our actions, then it was worth every cent, every drop of blood, sweat, and tears we shed.

Those people were dead, Swamp. They were just waiting their turn to be buried. They have a chance, you selfish, greedy, me-me-me, complacent goof. And some died – but so did the founders of our nation, disregarding the “safe” path that allowed tyranny to rule unchallenged. Too many “liberals” complain of the cost, ignoring the pile of bodies that went to making their right (RIGHT!) to complain possible.

I’m ranting again; God save me, I am not as strong as I should be. I am fallable, weak, and human. But I am a soldier, and I will cleave to my duty and find strength in my honor. Don’t think that the men and women who gave all gave in vain. They gave for that elusive, precious, and irreplacable commodity – hope.

And I hope the Iraqi people fulfill that hope. But I know that the enemy is not attacking my home, my business, or my nation on our land. And I know why – so do you, if you look at what the enemy is saying.

And that too, is what “defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic” means. They would be fighting us anyway – you want the shootout in your house or theirs?

And Ari; there are no dispassionate historians; the ISP could have stopped the hijackers by turning their trainers over to INTERPOL when they crossed the border from Syria and moved overland to Turkey with ISP assistance before boarding planes into the EU to give guidance to the hijackers. Or even by taking Bin Laden out and shooting him instead of throwing a four day feast/orgy congratulating him on the USS Cole and US Embassy incidents.

‘Nuff said – There is a lot of Truth out there, but few, if any, are willing to address it.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. SGT Dave says

    All,
    The only problem I have at this time is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, there were indeed chemical weapons in Iraq at the time of the invasion. We captured some while I was serving in Baghdad (the 500 “old” rounds) and had at least one shell used as an IED.
    Saddam had all the physical machinery in place to start making chemical and biological weapons; he didn’t have the chemical precursors, but was seeking them. The same goes with radiological/nuclear weaponry. The only reason he didn’t have these items was lack of ways he could get money out of the country and into the hands of the dealers.
    The bottom line remains that at least five tons of the chemical weapons reported destroyed by the UN inspectors were recovered by US forces; the mobile laboratory facilities reported destroyed by Iraq and the UN were captured in western Iraq during the opening days of the war; the Saddam regime attempted to purchase yellow-cake uranium for refining (despite C.Wilson’s false statements to the press – contradicting his sworn report) in a centrifuge array that was captured by US forces – again reported as destroyed by Iraq and the UN; and Saddam ordered items shipped to Syria (though the contents of those shipments is not known/releasable at this time).
    The writing on the wall is just about as clear as the German redeployment of the Panzer divisions eastward into Poland. If not for the Germans’ own crazy leader interfering with the battle plan, the ignorance and arrogance of the Russian leader of the time nearly brought down an entire nation in a single campaign season. While Bush is no Churchill or Roosevelt, I fear that the other choices we were given would have given results in the range of Stalin or Chamberlain.
    Wow, quite a rant – even for me.
    Even now the literate and relatively knowledgable are falling prey to the spin. Don’t concede that there “weren’t” WMD – there were. Don’t even let them put out that there “wasn’t a significant amount” – enough agent to kill over a million people ten times over is quite a bit. They are lying now, as they were before, but they are lying about the lies that they told about the lies. Don’t give them the first step; they will keep lying until the truth is only known by those willing to dig into the classified and official “sworn” documents.
    Don’t be a victim of Newspeak and Newthink. They’re lying to you.
    SGT Dave – “The greatest trick the devil ever accomplished was to convince people he never existed.”

  2. Al says

    Saddam never had WMD’s just like he never had relations with Al-Qiada. I guess providing medical support doesn’t count.
    The Libs need to be constantly reminded about the gas, but I had not heard of the centrifuges. Thanks, Sgt Dave.
    Al

  3. swampacreage says

    Not only beware of the devil but false prophets as well !

    “He that saith ,I know Him, and keepeth not his commandments,is a liar,and the truth is not in Him.”

    ” so you also appear righteous to many but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity”

  4. Danny Lemieux says

    Whether he had them or was bluffing, it doesn’t matter.

    A man walks into a bank with a bulky overcoat and hands a note to the teller, “I am wearing a bomb and I have a pistol in my pocket. Hand over your money or else”, the proper response is to shoot him, not to ask him to open his coat to prove it.

    Fact is, Saddam was living under a cease fire that he repeatedly violated, including by not disclosing his WMD programs. The “Second Iraq War” was simply a continuation of the first. After all, there should be consequences to violating the losing end of a cease-fire, shouldn’t there?

  5. swampacreage says

    You would think some people would blush with their spin (but hey Super hero Dave Osborne didn’t)on the take of things but hey whata I know(other than I”m no neo-com . . . oops a Freudian slip . . honest . . . . I’m no commie . . . I meant neo-con) The low brow would be clueless of what you are talking about, the middle would be confused. However the highbrow on both sides can see your point. But of those two sides one side would disagree with you(not that there is anything wrong with that )

    ps My new moniker is Super Dave Swamp Osborne(now people sit up and take notice of me ). Relax . . I jest with you a bit. I disagree with you. No harm . . no foul.

  6. swampacreage says

    Satan . . er I mean Saddams huffing and bluffing was like a 5 year old child.’s tantrum. You don’t cause the destruction of thousands . . dare I say millions of innocent peoples lives just because you can ! Where are all of those neo-con skunks hiding now.? In a hole ?

  7. says

    Eventually (30-40 years) dispassionate historians will be able to lay out all the facts. Until then we can just observe around the edges and remember that the definition of trust isn’t what you know, it’s what you don’t. And I trust Mr. Bush.
    Consider what Libya was doing at the time. Any doubt Saddam didn’t know, had not been offered the same deal(s).

    And then there’s the Iraqi Secret Police whose lives depended on Saddam’s health, and their activities around the world. Any doubt that, had they a mind to, given their penetration into all the real and perceived threats (unconstrained by our “sensibilities”) they could have stopped 9-11 – even though they likely did not know the specifics?

    Time will tell. Eventually there will be a true movie about an inconvenient truth.

  8. Mike Devx says

    I just want to thank SGT Dave for his comment, and thank Bookworm for giving it visibility on the main page. I did NOT know these facts! Interesting that, though I pay attention, I didn’t know them. I can only imagine what the vast majority of Americans – who are hardly paying ANY attention – think.

    Any further info SGT Dave can provide about any WMD capabilities of any sort by Saddam Hussein, it would be great!

  9. SGT Dave says

    Swamp,
    Saddam was killing dozens every day in Baghdad, not to mention the “swamp Arabs” and the Kurds.

    Training areas used to practice hijackings – including a set of four that killed about 3,000 Americans.

    Mid-grade weaponized anthrax, enough to pollute an area the size of Kansas.

    Enough sarin, VX, and mustard gas to kill every Shi’ite in Baghdad.

    And I won’t go into the torture and rape rooms – it took days to get the images out of my nightmares.

    Saddam may have been lying on some things, but you cannot take that kind of risk. I’m out here; I was there. The truth is that we didn’t do it because we “can”. We did it because the risk was too high regarding what he could have done. There is no defense in thousands of miles of sea any longer.

    Maybe I’m a simple reactionary, but I believe it was worth the time I spent there. I have friends that still serve and believe it was worth it. You didn’t get to meet a young woman of my acquaintance, there in Mashtal in Baghdad. She didn’t have fingers on her left hand and her right leg didn’t work quite right anymore. When she was eight Uday thought she was very pretty playing in the schoolyard. She can’t ever have kids and was trembling when she took the aid bag from my hand, with food for her mother and sister. My counterpart with Civil Affairs and her female terp got the story of why she was scared of the big men in uniform.

    I will never, ever, forget the look on that woman’s face and the fear those unspeakable individuals made manifest in her. If one – ONE – little girl in that place was spared this by our actions, then it was worth every cent, every drop of blood, sweat, and tears we shed.

    Those people were dead, Swamp. They were just waiting their turn to be buried. They have a chance, you selfish, greedy, me-me-me, complacent goof. And some died – but so did the founders of our nation, disregarding the “safe” path that allowed tyranny to rule unchallenged. Too many “liberals” complain of the cost, ignoring the pile of bodies that went to making their right (RIGHT!) to complain possible.

    I’m ranting again; God save me, I am not as strong as I should be. I am fallable, weak, and human. But I am a soldier, and I will cleave to my duty and find strength in my honor. Don’t think that the men and women who gave all gave in vain. They gave for that elusive, precious, and irreplacable commodity – hope.

    And I hope the Iraqi people fulfill that hope. But I know that the enemy is not attacking my home, my business, or my nation on our land. And I know why – so do you, if you look at what the enemy is saying.

    And that too, is what “defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic” means. They would be fighting us anyway – you want the shootout in your house or theirs?

    And Ari; there are no dispassionate historians; the ISP could have stopped the hijackers by turning their trainers over to INTERPOL when they crossed the border from Syria and moved overland to Turkey with ISP assistance before boarding planes into the EU to give guidance to the hijackers. Or even by taking Bin Laden out and shooting him instead of throwing a four day feast/orgy congratulating him on the USS Cole and US Embassy incidents.

    ‘Nuff said – There is a lot of Truth out there, but few, if any, are willing to address it.

    SGT Dave – “The object of the exercise is to kill the enemy. Everything else destroyed is collateral.” – excerpt from mission brief prior to the firebombing of Dresden, WWII

  10. Allen says

    When one is forced to make a decision with only partial information, the don’t care state takes on great importance. The don’t care state is used in digital logic. When an input can either 1 or 0 and it doesn’t affect the output then that input can be considered “don’t care.”

    How does that apply here? Before the invasion I assumed all of what was presented to be true, and came to the conclusion, don’t invade, for a variety of strategic reasons.

    Now if you assume he didn’t have them, one would come to the same conclusion.

    The fact that Saddam was bluffing, and we found some of the weapons, doesn’t change the fact that the invasion was a mistake, IMO.

    Regardless, whether Bush lied or not, it doesn’t change the state on the ground, we are there. Now what? Who lied or who bluffed, is really a don’t care state in and of itself.

  11. SGT Dave says

    Mike Devx,
    There should be quite a bit available on open source through the Foreign Military Studies Office at Ft. Leavenworth, KS. The translation and document exploitation office has been working hard, but there is only so much those dedicated men and women can do. Most of the material will be available online, though I don’t have the OSIS/OSINT website with me right now. I do know that some documents are being handled via K-State through the academic outreach (or were when I left in June).
    Good luck in the search, and welcome to the sunlight.
    SGT Dave – “There is more to life than your philosophy…”

  12. swampacreage says

    Bush chose . . er I mean Cheney and leftover pals from Bush 1 chose to mislead and strike as opposed to containment.. The rest is history. Your children and grandchildren can untangle it . Might want to rethink the goof part and get back to me in twenty years !

  13. SGT Dave says

    BW,
    Thanks for listening to an old soldier rant. I’ll put myself to bed now (living on KFOR time) and try to sleep.
    Good night and be well, may this missive find all of you at peace.
    SGT Dave – “It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.” – Gen. George S. Patton

  14. SGT Dave says

    Swamp,
    I know it wasn’t my fault; but I can’t live with doing nothing about it. That’s why in about a year it will likely be WO1 Dave, finishing out the last six years of a career I thought I gave up in ’98 for the National Guard and a cushy civilian job as an interpreter.
    I lost friends in ’03 and ’04 during the push on Baghdad, OIF 1, and OEF. And I still believe (despite the assurances of my wife and friends with whom I work and confide) that if I had been there, they would not have been lost. I’m not the young, slightly off-kilter tactical intel fanatic I once was. But I was better than some of the leaders I left my men and women serving.
    And that, my friend, was because I believed that the world had gotten peaceful – and I stopped paying attention. I have a wife, handsome young son, and beautiful daughter now. I have infinitely more to lose than before I left active duty the first time.
    And yet, I am here – because I can’t, won’t allow myself to become complacent again and let it grow.
    I lost a friend on that bright September morning; he was last seen holding open a fire escape door and helping guide people out.
    And I wonder if I had stayed in, kept working and hunting for bad guys instead of walking away, if he would still be here.
    So we all bear the burden of our choices, and while no one – single – person could have stopped it, I have to wonder how many – single – people doing that one thing differently would have made the difference?
    I never want to think I may have been that one ever again.
    SGT Dave – “Death is light as a feather; Duty heavier than lead.”

  15. Deana says

    Sgt. Dave -

    Thanks for taking the time to write all that you did on this post. I really appreciate what you said.

    I know you wish you had made different choices in terms of staying in but I’m just grateful that you and folks like you chose to serve at all. You’ve made a difference in the lives of all Americans and untold numbers of people in other countries – and I’m grateful for it every day.

    Deana

  16. says

    I’m ranting again; God save me, I am not as strong as I should be. I am fallable, weak, and human. But I am a soldier, and I will cleave to my duty and find strength in my honor. Don’t think that the men and women who gave all gave in vain. They gave for that elusive, precious, and irreplacable commodity – hope.

    Listen to this. It is soothing, Dave.

    Link

  17. forparity says

    Reinvading Iraq??

    RE: ” Because, says Piro, “For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that [faking having the weapons] would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq,” he tells Pelley.”

    Gee, I thought it was Iraq that invaded Iran, back in about 1980.

Trackbacks

  1. 2008.01.25 Politics and National Defense Roundup

    This post will grow as the day goes on. Don’t forget to check back later. Yeah, let’s make the NYT editorial board happy by nominating McCain. Or maybe we can elect Rudy so he can have the Secret Service smuggle his next mistress in and out of the Li…

Leave a Reply