Overall I think it was a good state of the Union Speech. Better than last year, by far.
Key point, I thought, was the message to Congress: Don't mess with the war on terror. It is a just war. We can debate it, but when all is said and done, you need to let our soldiers win this war and you need to give them whatever they ask need to win.
We must remove conditions which create blind hatred. Terrorists hate most: freedom. Free people are not drawn toward malignant ideologies. We serve our own interest when we help moderate governments.
We see desire for freedom throughout middle east. (Hahahaha McCain looks like he is sleeping)12 million Iraqis showed up to vote.
Our enemies have seen this and have adjusted their tactics. Assassinations, sectarian provocation, etc.
Iranian support of death squads in Iraq (hrm!).
It is still within our power to shape this battle, let us turn towards victory (full ovation) Give our soldiers the troops they need to complete their mission. The Iraqi's are not yet ready to do this on their own. We are deploying more troops to Iraq. Majority to Baghdad. Others to Anbar province to put down gorillas. Orders are to find terrorists and clear them out.
We did not drive terrorists out of Afghanistan only to let them set up shop in Iraq. Iraq must step up to the plate also. Iraq's leaders have committed to benchmarks to rebuild Iraq, local elections, oil revenue sharing, etc. But to make this happen, their capitol must be secure.
This new course of action provides best chance of success. If troops pull out, civil war, chaos, victory for the terrorists. To allow this to happen would be to ignore lesson of 9/11. We must spare the American people from this danger.
This is where we stand. We went into this united. Whatever you voted for you did not vote for failure. support the troops in the field and those on their way. (full ovation).
War on terror is generational struggle. We must work together to see this threat through. Create special bi-partisan advisory committee in war on terror.
Authorize increase in size of military.
Establish volunteer design core (civilian reserves? THAT is interesting)
Iran may not acquire nuclear weapons (full standing ovation). UN EU Russia all working for peace in middle east. NATO taking lead in Afghanistan. China, Japan, South Korea working to keep Asia free of nuclear weapons.
Save the people of Cuba, Darfour (SP?).
America is more than war and diplomacy. We take on poverty, hunger, AIDS (especially in Africa). 50,000 up to 800,000 receiving aids meds in Africa. We must also support Malaria.
Let us continue to support trade and debt relief to eliminate poverty.
Show generosity of our people.
(Some NBA star originally from Africa shown as good example of humanity, Baby Einstein creator: good example of American business/social entrepreneur, NYC man jumped onto track to save anothers life:Brave and humble man. Sgt. Reiman used own body as shield to protect his fellow soldier... refused medical treatment to continue in battle, awarded silver star, earned respect and gratitude of our entire country)
We have been through a lot together. The state of our union is strong. Our goals are just.
The end.
Live from my living room, clad in my flannel pajama's, the President is now walking down the aisle.
The President's tie looks remarkably similar to the tie Barack Obama was wearing. Same looking blue from across the room.
I was surprised at how short Obama is compared to the rest of the crowd. He is a short man with Big Ears. Kinda reminds me of Ross Perot in that sense. I wonder if Hillary will agree with that sentiment come primary time.
Lots of clapping so far... reminds me of golf clapping. These people don't genuinely seem happy to be here.
The President's first words: How Ya doin. Then to Pelosi: You ready to go?
The first comment Bush makes in his speech was a remark on being the first President to have the privilege to say "Madame Speaker"
Again, another comment (kissing up?) to Pelosi.
Second remarks were about two congressmen who were absent (sick).
Enough formalities, on to the show:
Courage is needed. New endeavors. Much is asked of us. We must have the wisdom to face our enemies.
Congratulations to the Democrat Majority (sucking up, more formality)
Purpose: solve problems, spend wisely, confront problems etc.
We have a growing economy. 41 months of growing economy. Low unemployment, low inflation. We need more enterprise, less government. (applause)
3 economic priorities.
1 Balance federal budget - do so without raising taxes. (much applause from republicans) Need spending discipline. Cut deficit in half 3 years ahead of schedule.
Plan to balance budget within 5 years. (that one is out the window when a new president comes in).
2 Need to get rid of earmarks. 13,000 earmarks in 2005. Let's reform process of earmarks (hahaha.. lets stop it now that Dems are in control. ahahahahahah)
3 Keep Social Security, medicare, Medicaid sound. We know there is a problem, we haven't done anything to fix it (No kidding. Bush made the problem worse with new entitlements)
Education Priorities:
5 years ago No Child Left Behind put in place. NCLB is having success. Increase funds for struggling children? WHAT!!! throw more money at the students who don't do well? That doesn't make sense.
Affordable and available health care:
Should be available to all: We should care for elderly, disabled, and young children.
2 new initiatives to help medical insurance/coverage
1 tax deductible health coverage (good idea). Helps those who have health care, helps put it in reach for those who don't
2 States which provide universal health care should be given grants for the young and for the elderly.
Expand health savings accounts. Help small business with health plans. Reduce costs in medical errors with better information technology (thanks big brother). Medical liability reform (republicans stand... shoulda got that one through last year)
Patients and Doctors should make decisions, not insurance companies (hey we got Kerry to stand for that one)
Secure borders:
Double border patrol. Push temporary worker program (Boooooooo). Give companies the tools to discover their workers citizenship (good luck with that, here comes the ACLU). NO amnesty? (since when?). Comprehensive immigration reform... yadayaddayada.
Energy Needs: Too much dependence on oil. Must diversify energy supply. More money for energy research. Ethanol, clean burning diesel, nuclear, battery powered cars, etc. Goal: Reduce gasoline use by 10% in next 25 years. (Hrm...) 3/4 of oil from middle east reduction if plan is successful.
Modernize car MPG standards. More domestic drilling.
This will help prevent Global Climate Change (full standing ovation): (President and cheney drank water at exact same time. heh.)
Senate has duty to give nominees for fed judges a prompt up or down vote.
5 years since 9/11. We are now debating the track in the war on terror. This is a good thing. One thing is settled, we must take the fight to the enemy (full standing ovation).
The days of easy financing, free movement, etc are over for terrorists. Some of the plots we have stopped:
1 plane into LA building
2 (didn't catch it)
3 anthrax cell
4 bombs in planes from UK
(full standing ovation)
America is still a nation at war. This war began before 9/11 and terrorists will not stop until they achieve their goals. All civilized society has opposite goals.
Terrorist goals: overthrow moderate governments, set up terrorist camps, spread ideology. Al qaeda is just one camp in radical Islamist movement. Sunni's (Sunni's?!?), Hezbolla, etc.
We will use all methods available to find enemies and protect American people.
Live from my living room, clad in flannel pajams, I am blogging live on the State of the Union.
Laura Bush and Lynn Cheney just came out. Laura looks lovely in that red dress.
The Supreme Court is walking out. Not much to say about them.
Madam Speaker, the President's Cabinet: (applause) Rice, and company minus Gonzales
Michael J Fox was pointed out as being in the crowd. He looked suprisingly well... no massive swaying or erratic jerks. I can't help but think back to his '06 political commercial. Limbaugh said he looked like he was off his med's or faking it. Limbaugh received a ton of criticism for that remark, BUT I have seen Fox on a number of occasions since the commercial and he has NOT appeared as sick as he did in that commercial.
It's taking quite a while for this shin dig to get started. Lots of milling about and shaking hands. Typical, but I don't remember it quite taking this long in year's past.
Since I had a minute, I will comment on Pelosi's outfit... ack, no time: here comes the President...
... and Bird Flu ... and Y2k ... and AIDS ...
For scientists and the press, it's a cash grab. For politicians, it's a power grab.
I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:
*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.
More.
Remember Avian Bird Flu? Birds were getting sick and dying from a new strain of bird flu. The fear is that the flu would jump from birds to mankind, which it did in a few isolated cases, maybe. Hundreds of thousands of birds were being slaughtered, as a precaution. Scientists were telling us were were all going to die if we didn't work on a vaccine, and that funding would be needed to prevent millions of human deaths. I wonder how many grants were made to stop this "epidemic."The infamous "plan" for Iraq the Democrats have been going on and on about since about as far back as late 2003 has yet to be made public; however, the boys at Cox and Forkum give us a good look at what they've come up with so far:
I've not been napping, I've been fastidiously attending to my Iraq War Mythology posts. I have just finished my WMD post this morning. I spent a great deal of time working on this post. I would greatly appreciate insight on this post, especially if I missed something important. Thank you.
Some quick fact-checking. uncovered a few important things:
While you were sleeping, the war with Iran might have begun.Not everyone is sleeping on this one. I think war with Iran may just be the elephant in the room. Shmuel is spot on in pointing out that the Democrats have not been sleeping on this one, either.
If the president concluded he had to invade Iran … or Syria in pursuit of these networks, I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that and he does need congressional authority to do that. … I just want to set that marker
Netanyahu is the most vocal alarmist on Iran, and in the meetings he has with U.S. visitors, he tends to repeat the analogy he uses in public. It's not about Vietnam, and it's not about Cambodia. "This is 1938," he says. "Iran is Germany, and it is about to arm itself with nuclear weapons." The Saudi monarch, I wrote in Ha'aretz, "for whom the Nazi analogy is not his natural domain, expressed exactly the same fear, but in somewhat different words." One of the senators came home with this nagging thought: Is it possible that Iraq is really the secondary issue—and Iran is what policy-makers ought to be worrying about?
I recently discussed in a post entitled The Iranian Connection Michael Ledeen's allegation that Iran is waging war against us. I quoted some snippets from Ledeen's article, which I will provide again, below:
"we had good information that terrorists were in Baghdad, and had gone to the compound. We did not know exactly who they were. We entered the compound and arrested everybody who looked like a usual suspect. One of them told us he was the #3 official of the al Quds unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, a particularly vicious group. He was carrying documents, one of which was in essence a wiring diagram of Iranian operations in Iraq. That wiring diagram included both Shi’ite and Sunni terrorist groups, and was of such magnitude that American officials were flabbergasted."
"I am told that this information has reached the president,"
I stated on January 4th, "Now that we have evidence that Iran IS involved in Iraq, it should and probably will force our hand. I just hope the American people have the stomach for a war with Iran. ... I look forward to Bush's remarks in the coming days regarding changes in US policy towards Iran."
That very same day the White House began floating the idea of increasing troop levels in Iraq. Increase in troops levels from as little as 1500 to as many as 20,000 troops were being floated in the media.
On January 4th, Tony Snow fielded the following questions:
On January 5th, Mr. Snow fielded more questions about troop levels, some of which referenced recent criticism by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid about any plan to increase troop levels:\
As you can imagine, each subsequent press conference had similar questions with regards to troop levels in Iraq.
Then on January 10th, less than a week after the US captured Iranian's working with terrorists in Iraq to destabilize the fledgling Iraqi government, the President, on prime time TV, outlined a plan which includeda plan to:
Few will deny that the President could not simply come out and say, "We have uncovered evidence that Iran has been working with al Qaeda. Evidence which proves a direct Iranian involvement in the ongoing sectarian conflict in Iraq. This action by the Iran government constitutes an act of war, and opens a new front in the war on terror." The political fallout, domestically and internationally would be unbearable, especially with Bush's poll numbers. Not to mention that troop levels in Iraq could not support an all out war with Iran. We need more troops in order to be able to sustain war with Iran. Besides, telling the world that we are going to war with Iran BEFORE our troops are in place would be insane.
However, a troop build-up backed up with another Aircraft Carrier in the middle east would make war against Iran a real feasibility. The "crisis" in Iraq is the perfect justification for putting the necessary units into place to proceed with the next phase of the War on Terror.
This blog is predicting war with Iran by 2008.
The following is the President's address to the nation with regards to the new Iraq strategy delivered prime time January 10, 2007:
via White House Press Room
9:01 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror -- and our safety here at home. The new strategy I outline tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.
When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation. The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement. We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together, and that as we trained Iraqi security forces we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.
But in 2006, the opposite happened. The violence in Iraq -- particularly in Baghdad -- overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made. Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq's elections posed for their cause, and they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis. They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra -- in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq's Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.
The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people -- and it is unacceptable to me. Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.
It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq. So my national security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a comprehensive review. We consulted members of Congress from both parties, our allies abroad, and distinguished outside experts. We benefitted from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq. And one message came through loud and clear: Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.
The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people. On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities. For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.
The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad. Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital. This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis. Only Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it.
Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have. Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work.
Now let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts. When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort, along with local police. These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations -- conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents.
This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them -- five brigades -- will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.
Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not. Well, here are the differences: In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents, but when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned. This time, we'll have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter those neighborhoods -- and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.
I've made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people -- and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people. Now is the time to act. The Prime Minister understands this. Here is what he told his people just last week: "The Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation."
This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad's residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace -- and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.
A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.
To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.
America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it works to meet these benchmarks. In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units, and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division. We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped army, and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance. We will double the number of provincial reconstruction teams. These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen the moderates, and speed the transition to Iraqi self-reliance. And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq.
As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters. Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq. Its home base is Anbar Province. Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital. A captured al Qaeda document describes the terrorists' plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province. This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq's democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.
Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders, and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda. And as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists. So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to keep up the pressure on the terrorists. America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan -- and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.
Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
We're also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence-sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.
We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors, and they must step up their support for Iraq's unity government. We endorse the Iraqi government's call to finalize an International Compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform. And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region, to build support for Iraq and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East.
The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life. In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy, by advancing liberty across a troubled region. It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom, and to help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East.
From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children. And they are looking at Iraq. They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists, or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom?
The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security. Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue -- and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties. The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success. I believe that it will.
Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship. But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world -- a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them -- and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and our grandchildren.
This new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the different courses we could take in Iraq. Many are concerned that the Iraqis are becoming too dependent on the United States, and therefore, our policy should focus on protecting Iraq's borders and hunting down al Qaeda. Their solution is to scale back America's efforts in Baghdad -- or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces. We carefully considered these proposals. And we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale. Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal. If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.
In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress on our new strategy. If members have improvements that can be made, we will make them. If circumstances change, we will adjust. Honorable people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms. It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed.
Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my administration; it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress. We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century. We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas, where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.
In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us. These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary -- and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our time. They serve far from their families, who make the quiet sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table. They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty. We mourn the loss of every fallen American -- and we owe it to them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.
Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can, and we will, prevail.
We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night.
To start, we do know that Saddam did have Weapons of Mass Destruction, primarily chemical weapons, which he used routinely during his bloody reign. He used WMDs against his enemies and he used WMDs against his own people.Examples of Known Iraqi Use of CW
The war with Iran ended in August 1988. By this time, seven UN specialist missions had documented repeated use of chemicals in the war. According to Iraq, it consumed almost 19,500 chemical bombs, over 54,000 chemical artillery shells and 27,000 short-range chemical rockets between 1983 and 1988. Iraq declared it consumed about 1,800 tons of mustard gas, 140 tons of Tabun, and over 600 tons of Sarin. Almost two-thirds of the CW weapons were used in the last 18 months of the war. Examples of CW use by Iraq:
Use in Iran-Iraq war, 1983-1988
August 1983 Haij Umran
Mustard , fewer than 100 Iranian/Kurdish casualties
October-November 1983 Panjwin
Mustard, 3,000 Iranian/Kurdish casualties
February-March 1984 Majnoon Island
Mustard, 2,500 Iranian casualties
March 1984 al-Basrah
Tabun, 50-100 Iranian casualties
March 1985 Hawizah Marsh
Mustard & Tabun, 3,000 Iranian casualties
February 1986 al-Faw
Mustard & Tabun, 8,000 to 10,000 Iranian casualties
December 1986 Um ar-Rasas
Mustard, 1,000s Iranian casualties
April 1987 al-Basrah
Mustard & Tabun, 5,000 Iranian casualties
October 1987 Sumar/Mehran
Mustard & nerve agent, 3,000 Iranian casualties
March 1988 Halabjah& Kurdish area
Mustard & nerve agent, 1,000s Kurdish/Iranian casualties
April 1988 al-Faw
Mustard & nerve agent, 1,000s Iranian casualties
May 1988 Fish Lake
Mustard & nerve agent, 100s or 1,000s Iranian casualties
June 1988 Majnoon Islands
Mustard & nerve agent, 100s or 1,000s Iranian casualties
July 1988 South-central border
Mustard & nerve agent, 100s or 1,000s Iranian casualties
Use in Southern Iraq against the Popular Uprising, 1991
March 1991, an-Najaf - Karbala area
These are selected uses only. Numerous other smaller scale CW attacks occurred.
Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;
Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated
"There is no doubt that the warheads contain chemical weapons," ... "The problem is what period they came from, whether the (Persian) Gulf War or earlier, and whether they were usable, partly usable or not at all."
In May, a booby-trapped artillery shell apparently filled with the sarin nerve agent exploded alongside a Baghdad road but caused no serious injuries to the U.S. forces who discovered it. At the time, officials stopped short of claiming the munition was definite evidence of a large weapons stockpile in prewar Iraq or evidence of recent production by Saddam's regime.
The UNMOVIC official said the group needs to know more from the Bush administration before it's possible to determine if this is "old or new stuff". It is known that Iraq used sarin during the Iraq-Iran war, however.
... the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war (search). Experts believe both the sarin and mustard gas weapons date back to that time.
Why classify information that would vindicate the US position in the lead up to the war?Polish troops had been searching for munitions as part of their regular mission in south-central Iraq when they were told by an informant in May that terrorists had made a bid to buy the chemical weapons, which date back to Saddam Hussein's (search) war with Iran in the 1980s, Gen. Marek Dukaczewski told reporters in Warsaw.
"We were mortified by the information that terrorists were looking for these warheads and offered $5,000 apiece," Dukaczewski said. "An attack with such weapons would be hard to imagine. All of our activity was accelerated at appropriating these warheads."
Dukaczewski refused to give any further details about the terrorists or the sellers of the munitions, saying only that his troops thwarted terrorists by purchasing the 17 rockets for a Soviet-era launcher and two mortar rounds containing the nerve agent for an undisclosed sum June 23.
A more popular theory is that Saddam moved his "new" WMDs out of the country, most likely to Syria. This theory has received support from Iraqi Generals, Israeli Intelligence, Former UN Inspectors, and possibly even Syrian Journalists. The theory has not been ruled out by the US government; however, the US has said repeatedly that they have no evidence of such a transfer. How could Saddam have transferred so much WMD related materials out of the country with the International community looking on? There are many who believe that Russia played a role in the removal and disbursement of evidence of Saddam's ongoing programs.Jordanian officials say the arrests occurred after suspected militants entered Jordan from neighboring Syria in at least three vehicles filled with explosives, detonators and raw material to be used in bomb-making.
Source.
With regards to 5) the means to develop WMDs, Saddam definitely had the means to reinstate his WMD programs. In fact, we know for certain that Saddam made inquires as late as 2001 about how long it would take to have the programs up and running.Iraq had an effective system for the procurement of items that Iraq was not allowed to acquire due to sanctions. ISG found no evidence that this system was used to acquire precursor chemicals in bulk; however documents indicate that dual-use laboratory equipment and chemicals were acquired through this system.
...
Available evidence indicates Iraq destroyed its hidden CW weapons and precursors, but key documentation and dual-use equipment were retained and were later discovered by inspectors.
...
The lack of inspectors allowed further dual-use infrastructure to be developed. The lack of effective monitoring emboldened Saddam and his illicit procurement activities.
...
Reflecting the importance the Regime attached to industrial and scientific progress and aiming to recover from the war with Iran, Baghdad undertook in the mid 1990s a centralized, national effort to coordinate Iraqi industrial activities. By the late 1990s, fueled by resources available through the Oil-for-Food program, that effort underlay a specific initiative aimed at boosting the capabilities of Iraqi pesticide and pharmaceutical industries, including the capability to manufacture dual-use chemicals. Although ISG found no direct evidence linking dual-use chemical production to an active or latent CW program, research and development on types of specific chemicals linked to Iraq’s CW program raises concerns about the legitimacy of Iraq’s chemical plans.
Source.
6. The Commission’s experts are conducting an investigation in parallel with the IAEA Iraq Nuclear Verification Office regarding the discovery of items from Iraq that are relevant to the mandates of UNMOVIC and IAEA at a scrapyard in the
Netherlands. In particular, following a visit of IAEA to a scrapyard in Rotterdam to investigate increased radiation readings, it was discovered, through photographs taken at the time, that engines of SA-2 surface-to-air missiles were among the scrap (see figure below). They are the type of engines used in the Al Samoud 2 proscribed missile programme. In addition, a number of items and equipment that may also be relevant to the UNMOVIC mandate were seen among the scrap. The existence of missile engines originating in Iraq among scrap in Europe may affect the accounting of proscribed engines known to have been in Iraq’s possession in March 2003. Both IAEA and UNMOVIC have kept the Security Council informed of this matter.
7. A team of Commission experts visited the site concerned in the Netherlands and examined one missile engine that had been salvaged from the scrap metal process. By comparing the serial production number on the engine with information in the UNMOVIC database, the experts were able to confirm that the engine was one from an SA-2 missile that had been tagged by United Nations inspectors in the past and had not been declared as having been fired. Representatives of the scrapyard company indicated that a number of similar engines (5 to 12) had been seen in the scrapyard in January and February of this year. More engines could have been processed and passed through the yard unnoticed. Company staff confirmed that other items made of stainless steel and other corrosion-resistant metal alloys bearing the inscription “Iraq” or “Baghdad” had been observed in shipments delivered from the Middle East since November 2003. A number of items were examined and sampled on-site by UNMOVIC experts with a portable metal analyser and were determined to be composed of inconel and titanium — both dual-use materials subject to monitoring. Photographs of other materials bearing Arabic script were taken.
8. Despite the active cooperation of the Government of the Netherlands and the company concerned, it was not possible to determine how many other engines and other material previously subject to monitoring in Iraq may have passed through this scrapyard (or others). It should also be noted that the scrapyard that was visited by UNMOVIC deals in high-quality stainless steel. Items and equipment made of dualuse materials subject to the provisions of the monitoring plan may also be coming out of Iraq to other destinations. The Commission is continuing its investigation.
9. In addition, the Commission is aware from comparative analysis of recent satellite imagery that a number of sites previously known to have contained equipment and materials subject to monitoring have been either cleaned out or destroyed. An example of such imagery is provided in the appendix to the present report. It is not known whether such equipment and materials were still present at the sites during the time of coalition action in March and April of 2003. However, it is possible that some of the materials may have been removed from Iraq by looters
of sites and sold as scrap.
Investigations into scrap material found outside Iraq
3. The Commission has continued its investigation into the discovery of items relevant to its mandate that have been exported from Iraq as scrap metal. At the beginning of June, Commission experts went to Jordan and with the support and cooperation of Jordanian authorities visited a number of trading companies dealing with the export of scrap metal from Iraq to Jordan. They visited scrapyards associated with the respective trading companies and interviewed relevant personnel, including trading company managers, merchants and truck drivers of Jordanian and Iraqi nationality.
4. A significant number of items relevant to the UNMOVIC mandate were observed at the scrapyards. They included 20 SA-2 missile engines, a solid propellant-mixing vessel tagged by UNMOVIC during its 2002-2003 inspection activities in Iraq, fragmented remains of an SA-2 airframe and booster, as well as four chemical-related vessels made of corrosion-resistant material that had been tagged by the Commission as dual-use items. According to information received from the trading company representatives, the tagged chemical vessels had been dismantled from the chemical industrial complex near Fallujah. The Commission’s experts were able to confirm that information by comparing the serial numbers of the United Nations tags still attached to the vessels with information in the UNMOVIC database.
5. During interviews conducted with more than 20 persons involved in the scrap metal trade, it was determined that the first scrap metal started arriving in Jordan from Iraq in June 2003. The flow of stainless steel and other more valuable alloys commenced later in the summer and continued in 2004. A rough estimate made by scrap company managers was that a total of 60,000 tons of Iraqi scrap metal had passed through Jordan’s largest free trade zone in 2003 and an additional 70,000 tons up until June 2004. UNMOVIC experts were told that that amount comprised only a small part of all scrap materials exported from Iraq to the other countries that border Iraq and further to Europe, North Africa and Asia. It was also said that a lot of high-quality industrial production equipment from facilities all over Iraq had been purchased by unnamed contractors at low cost, dismantled and moved out of the country. If correct, this could include equipment subject to monitoring in Iraq.
6. According to some of the merchants, the authorities in Iraq had overall control of the scrap export business. Several sites that were monitored previously by UNMOVIC were mentioned as having been razed. Information on the web site of the Iraqi Ministry of Trade (www.motiraq.org) sets out the licensing and other procedures for the export of scrap. There are seven stipulated border crossings to all of Iraq’s neighbouring countries, via which scrap metals can be exported. The Iraqi port of Umm Qasr is also authorized to trade directly with the rest of the world.
7. Following the visit to Jordan, information was received from the Government of the Netherlands of the discovery in early July by a Rotterdam scrap company of an additional 22 SA-2 missile engines in a shipment from Turkey. The Commission requested the support of the Government of Turkey to facilitate a visit by UNMOVIC experts to a Turkish company believed to be involved in the trading of scrap originating in Iraq.
8. With the cooperation of the Government of Turkey, a team of UNMOVIC and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) experts visited an Istanbul scrapyard in the second half of July 2004. No items of relevance to UNMOVIC were found at the yard of the company. The team was told that the Turkish company only acted as a transit broker for scrap metal originating in Iraq. Turkish customs officials later explained that scrap from Iraq was transported through Turkey under seal to customs clearing yards, where it was loaded into containers for onward shipment to foreign markets. The experts observed the removal of customs tags from one of the trucks arriving from Iraq. While they were not able to witness the unloading of the truck into the container, a cursory examination of the upper layers of the load did not reveal any items related to Iraq’s past weapons programmes or materials subject to monitoring. When questioned, no one recalled seeing any missile engines or other materials relevant to UNMOVIC, but it was stated that it was quite possible that some had passed through Turkey.
9. With the agreement of the relevant Member States, UNMOVIC intends to observe the destruction of the SA-2 missile engines located in Jordan and the Netherlands together with other tagged and dual-use equipment that had been under monitoring in Iraq. All identifying data have been recorded and photographs have been taken.
From at least 1999 onward Saddam became increasingly interested in the activities of the IAEC and began holding regular meetings with representatives of the IAEC. Saddam also began to personally intervene in matters related to the IAEC, ranging from internal personnel issues, to prompting other organizations to work with the IAEC and utilize the IAEC’s scientific capabilities. In late 1996, Saddam agreed to the Oil-for-Food program, resulting in significant fund, which he was able to use to bolster his scientific base.
A former scientist at the IAEC spoke of many scientists leaving the IAEC in 1999 because conditions were so poor. The scientist claims that Saddam personally intervened, beginning in 1999, to improve conditions and raise salaries. He also made what the scientist called “a blanket rule” at this time forbidding scientists from leaving their posts.
Dr. Huwaysh recalled that in 2001 and 2002 the frequency of meetings between Saddam and Iraqi nuclear scientists increased. During the same time frame, Saddam also issued a Presidential Order to the President of the IAEC, Dr. Fadil Al-Janabi, that he should keep nuclear scientists together at the IAEC in order to pool their skills and have them available when needed for starting numerous new projects. Dr. Huwaysh did not know the specific details of any of these projects.
Dr. Huwaysh also recalled that, circa 2000, when Saddam found out that former nuclear workers in the IAEC were not being paid as well as those in the MIC, he met with Al-Janabi, initiated raises in their salaries, and instituted a bonus scheme.
A former MIC official stated that, in January 2002, Saddam issued an order requiring the MIC to cooperate with the IAEC and to implement projects in the areas of physics, machining, and electronics.
Saddam also began to take an increased interest in the welfare of former nuclear scientists in the MIC. Dr. Huwaysh stated that in 2000 Saddam began asking about the welfare of former PC-3 scientists within the MIC and referred to them as “my people.” Saddam, a former IAEC Chairman in the mid-1970s, reportedly made it clear that he cared greatly about the former nuclear program and began showing a renewed level of interest in it at this time.
Source.
ISG has uncovered two instances in which scientists linked to Iraq’s pre-1991 uranium enrichment programs kept documentation and technology in anticipation of renewing these efforts—actions that they contend were officially sanctioned.
A former engineer in the pre-1991 EMIS program claimed he was told by the head of MIC in 1997 to continue his work with ion implantation at his Al Tahaddi lab as a way to preserve EMIS technology.
The former head of Iraq’s pre-1991 centrifuge program also retained prohibited documents and components in apparent violation of the Regime’s directives. Though this activity was isolated, it also had the potential to contribute to a possible restart of Iraq’s uranium enrichment programs.
Source.
Nuke program parts unearthed in Baghdad back yard
The parts, with accompanying plans, were unearthed by Iraqi scientist Mahdi Obeidi who had hidden them under a rose bush in his garden 12 years ago under orders from Qusay Hussein and Saddam Hussein's then son-in-law, Hussein Kamel.
U.S. officials emphasized this was not evidence Iraq had a nuclear weapon -- but it was evidence the Iraqis concealed plans to reconstitute their nuclear program as soon as the world was no longer looking.
The parts and documents Obeidi gave the CIA were shown exclusively to CNN at CIA headquarters in Virginia.
Obeidi told CNN the parts of a gas centrifuge system for enriching uranium were part of a highly sophisticated system he was ordered to hide to be ready to rebuild the bomb program.
"I have very important things at my disposal that I have been ordered to have, to keep, and I've kept them, and I don't want this to proliferate, because of its potential consequences if it falls in the hands of tyrants, in the hands of dictators or of terrorists," said Obeidi, who has been taken out of Iraq with the help of the U.S. government.
Obeidi also said he was not the only scientist ordered to hide that type of equipment.
"I think there may be more than three other copies. And I think it is quite important to look at this list so they will not fall into the hands of the wrong people," he said.
Centrifuges are drums or cylinders that spin at high speed and separate heavy and light molecules, allowing increasingly enriched uranium to be drawn off.
More.
In February 1999, Zahawie left his Vatican office for a few days and paid an official visit to Niger, a country known for absolutely nothing except its vast deposits of uranium ore. It was from Niger that Iraq had originally acquired uranium in 1981....
...
However, the waters have since become muddied, to say the least. For a start, someone produced a fake document, dated July 6, 2000, which purports to show Zahawie's signature and diplomatic seal on an actual agreement for an Iraqi uranium transaction with Niger. Almost everything was wrong with this crude forgery....
...
But this doesn't alter the plain set of established facts.... The European intelligence services, and the Bush administration, only ever asserted that the Iraqi regime had apparently tried to open (or rather, reopen) a yellowcake trade "in Africa." It has never been claimed that an agreement was actually reached. What motive could there be for a forgery that could be instantly detected upon cursory examination?
There seem to be only three possibilities here. Either a) American intelligence concocted the note; b) someone in Italy did so in the hope of gain; or c) it was the product of disinformation, intended to protect Niger and discredit any attention paid to the actual, real-time Zahawie visit.
Read the whole article.
Butler Report: It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999. The British Government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger’s exports, the intelligence was credible.
U.S. transferred nearly 2 tons of uranium from Iraq to U.S. without U.N. authorization
UNITED NATIONS – The United States didn't have authorization from the U.N. nuclear watchdog when it secretly shipped from Iraq uranium and highly radioactive material that could be used in so-called "dirty bombs," U.N. officials said Wednesday.
The nearly 2 tons of low-enriched uranium and approximately 1,000 highly radioactive items transferred from Iraq to the United States last month had been placed under seal by the International Atomic Energy Agency at the sprawling Tuwaitha nuclear complex, 12 miles south of Baghdad, the officials said.
...
According to the letter, the United States informed the IAEA on June 30 that approximately 1.8 tons of uranium, enriched to a level of 2.6 percent, another 6.6 pounds of low-enriched uranium, and approximately 1,000 highly radioactive sources had been transferred on June 23.
...
In 1992, after the first Gulf War, all highly enriched uranium – which could be used to make nuclear weapons – was shipped from Iraq to Russia, the IAEA's Zlauvinen said.
After 1992, roughly 2 tons of natural uranium, or yellow cake, some low enriched uranium and some depleted uranium was left at Tuwaitha under IAEA seal and control, he said.
...
IAEA inspectors left Iraq just before last year's U.S.-led war. After it ended, Washington barred U.N. weapons inspectors from returning, deploying U.S. teams instead in a so far unsuccessful search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
...
ElBaradei's letter said that an unspecified amount of nuclear material still at Tuwaitha consists mainly of natural uranium, some depleted uranium and some low enriched uranium waste, which is subject to IAEA monitoring.
Read the full article.
Iraq Raid Yields Possible Chemical Production Facility
WASHINGTON, Aug. 13, 2005 – Acting on detainee-provided tips, coalition forces found what's believed to be an insurgent chemical production facility and chemical storage locations during Aug. 9 raids in northern Iraq, officials in Iraq reported today
Alleged chemical weapons factory uncovered in Iraq
August 14, 2005
BAGHDAD -- US troops raiding a warehouse in the northern city of Mosul uncovered a suspected chemical weapons factory containing 1,500 gallons of chemicals believed destined for attacks on US and Iraqi forces and civilians, military officials said yesterday.
The early morning raid last Monday found 11 precursor agents, "some of them quite dangerous by themselves," a military spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Steven Boylan,said in Baghdad.
Combined, the chemicals would yield an agent capable of "lingering hazards" for those exposed to it, Boylan said. The likely targets would have been "coalition and Iraqi security forces, and Iraqi civilians," partly because the chemicals would be difficult to keep from spreading over a wide area, he said.
Iraqi forces find chemical materials in lab
Iraqi soldiers have discovered chemical materials in a Falluja lab....
...
Iraq's interim National Security Adviser Kasim Dawood announced discovery of the lab with chemical materials which he said was "manufacturing death, intoxication and assassination."
"We have also discovered in this laboratory a pamphlet and instructions showing how to manufacture explosives and toxins," Dawood said. "And they also talk about the production of anthrax."
In February 2003, U.N. inspectors evaluated two versions of the Al Samoud 2 missile using four separate computer models. Both versions were found to exceed the range limit of 150 kilometers set by the U.N. Security Council. The lighter version of the Al Samoud 2 was estimated to have a range of 193 kilometers, while the heavier version would be capable of a 162 km range. Accordingly, it was requested that all Al Samoud 2 missiles and warheads be delivered to the inspectors for destruction.
Despite the limitations imposed by the UN sanctions and the international arms embargo, Iraq was able to produce and field the domestically designed Al Fat’h composite solid-propellant ballistic missile. The goal of the program, which commenced in June 1997, was to develop a missile that could deliver a 300-kg payload to a range of 150 km with an accuracy of 150 meters Circular Error Probable (CEP). The accuracy requirement for an unguided version of the Al Fat’h was 750 meters CEP. The Al Fat'h program began under the Ababil-100 project in the early 1990s. By 1994 the liquid- and solid-propellant missile development programs under Ababil-100 had split, and the solid-propellant program retained the Ababil-100 name. The Iraq Survey Group (ISG) concluded that the Al Fat'h was used with a unitary High Explosive (HE) warhead or a Submunition warhead, and was not intended for Chemical or Biological Weapon (CBW) use.
Source.
Although ISG has recovered no evidence to suggest that “special” warheads were developed for the Al Samuds, the warhead is a direct extrapolation of the impact warhead design for the Scud and Al Husayn missiles and could be modified in the same way Iraq modified the Al Husayn HE warhead to produce crude CBW warheads.
Iraq retained the intellectual capital for reproducing these kinds of “special” warhead designs, so modification and production of this crude type of warhead could be achieved in a matter of weeks with a relatively small team of specialized individuals.
Barack Obama
