http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/01/09/sproject.irq.blix.inspections/index.html Blix: Inspectors 'unsatisfied' with Iraq Officials: U.S. giving intelligence to inspectors Thursday, January 9, 2003 Posted: 1:56 PM EST (1856 GMT) UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- U.N. weapons inspectors are "unsatisfied" with Iraq's declaration of its weapons programs, but U.N. officials have not yet found any "smoking guns," the U.N. chief weapons inspector said Thursday. Hans Blix, the head of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspections Commission (UNMOVIC), and Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, briefed the Security Council Thursday on the progress of weapons inspectors. "The declaration didn't provide us any new evidence," Blix said. "So we are not satisfied." ElBaradei said inspections are "inching forward" but U.N. teams need "more actionable information" from member states. Before the briefing, Blix said, "We have now been there for two months and we have been covering the country in ever-wider sweeps. We have not found any smoking guns, no, but we have been able to re-baseline more and more. "And if we were to find something dramatic, we would report that immediately to the Security Council." A top Iraqi official said Thursday that Baghdad is complying with inspections "without any hindrance," and inspectors have demonstrated that Baghdad has given up its pursuit of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The White House said Thursday that Iraq was hiding its weapons of mass destruction. "While [inspectors] have said that there is no smoking gun, they said the absence of it is not assured," said White House spokesman Ari Flesicher. "And that's the heart of the problem. The heart of the problem is Iraq is very good at hiding things." U.S. officials said that the United States has begun sharing "significant" intelligence information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction that has enabled inspection teams to more aggressively pursue possible evidence. "We are getting intelligence from several sources," Blix said. "I will not go into the operative part of that, but it's clear that this will be helpful in the future to us." Since the Iraqi weapons declaration was handed over on December 7, analysts in New York have been scrutinizing the document, comparing it with prior declarations and a database kept by UNMOVIC. Rather than resolving outstanding questions in the various weapons areas UNMOVIC is looking at -- chemical, biological and missile -- a U.N. official said. "We're finding more holes ... in all categories." The official would not specify particular gaps. U.N. inspectors revisited several sites Thursday in their search for evidence of a clandestine weapons program, but bad weather forced one team's helicopter to return to Baghdad. Amin: 'Allegations are all false' Iraq was required to give up weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles under the U.N. resolutions that ended the 1991 Persian Gulf War. In Baghdad, the head of the Iraqi agency that deals with weapons inspections told reporters that Baghdad has complied with those mandates. "The inspections are continuing without any hindrance," said Gen. Hossam Amin, the head of Iraq's National Monitoring Directorate. "The inspections also have confirmed that the British and American allegations are all false, and Iraq does not have any nuclear weapons or weapons or mass destruction." The United States and Britain have dispatched troops, aircraft and warships to the region in preparation for a possible conflict with Iraq, but Blix noted the U.N. resolution sending inspectors back to Iraq "does not give any time limit for inspections." "February's not the end of time," he said. Blix and ElBaradei are scheduled to return to Iraq on January 19 in an attempt to get Baghdad to provide more information about its weapons programs. Iraqi officials have charged in recent days that the inspectors are spying rather than inspecting. Amin said he has complained to Blix that some inspectors are asking questions "of a dubious character" that he called "irrelevant to the work." Iraqi leaders accuse the United States of trying to use the January 27 report as a pretext for a military attack. But in London, The Daily Telegraph reported that British Prime Minister Tony Blair wants to give inspectors until as late as autumn to find clear evidence of new violations by Iraq. "The prime minister has made it clear that, unless there is a smoking gun, the inspectors have to be given time to keep searching," the newspaper quoted a senior Whitehall source as saying. CNN Correspondents Richard Roth and David Ensor contributed to this report.
Logistically, I simply don't see how these weapons inspections can ever work. It's like trying to find a needle in a hay field.
or, rather, prove that there are absolutely no metal needles in a field of straw needles. And you must prove this to somebody who is already convinced that a metal needle exists and desperately wants to invade the field. Game over. It's just completely stupid.
or, rather, prove that there ARE metal needles in a field of straw needles. And you must prove this to a multitude of people who seem convinced that no metal needles exist. And sadly, you have proof that the metal needles exist, but you can't divulge this evidence for fear of compromising your intelligence community. Regardless where the truth lies, it is completely stupid.
or, perhaps, the needles are made of cheese, and the inspectors are mice, and Saddam is a guy who likes to hide cheese in his pants, where no mice are allowed.
it's so stupid that we were all calling for weapons inspections two months ago and saying that the bush administration was jumping the gun without them.
Who is this "we" you speak of? I've always maintained the inspections are moronic. Of course, I also think we should have assassinated Saddam years ago, so I guess I'm somewhat on the fringe. As an aside, did you know assassinate has two asses in it?
I don't get your point MadMax. Bush was acting like a cowboy until everyone freaked out. It took the Powells et al to calm the little chickenhawk down. It took public outrage and concerns over the little trigger happy punk to calm him down. Even now, with the UN inspectors declaring that they have found nothing, we mock the UN by using the 'inspection game' as the simple delay that it takes to get the forces in position. the US is telling the UK to expect a War in mid February. If we find anything, great for Bush. If we don't, he won't divert from this path. We will go to war with Iraq... because we can. We will cower when it comes to North Korea, because we can't do anything else. Bush is a p***y, by definition.
my point here is that so many of us were demanding there be weapons inspections...now we're all looking with hindsight and saying, "wow...these weapons inspections are moronic." as an aside...i think bush plays bad cop for a reason...you never start negotiations asking for merely what you want...you ask for what you want plus something else...and you threaten to take more off the table then you're really ready to. i don't think bush was ever going to actually implement a unilateral attack on iraq without going through the un first. his strong language resulted in a unanimous security council resolution... i'm not as convinced as you are that we will go to war with iraq.
We just wanted to give the impression of being fair by going through the steps, before we b**** slap Saddam stupid again. Of course after the regime change, there is always the risk that Iraq really is WMD free, but then we can always plant a few WMD for the cause. And what would that cause be boys and girls? OIL!!!
Why are we spending billions of dollars in a troop build up if we're not going to war? How stupid will it look if we spend all of this money sending troops and equipment to the region only to have them sit around for months doing nothing? Blix says there is no time limit on inspections and the Brits want to wait until August! Cha ching, cha ching.
Yeah, the US would plant WMD in Iraq after a war. Give me a break. I bet you guys call yourselves patriotic too, right?
(I didn't post the planting idea, BUT ...) damn straight. Patriotic does not equal gullibly swallowing everything your "elected" officials decide to do. Patriotism is loving your country and wanting it to stand for truth and justice. So fly the little flag from your SUV and nod "yes" to CNN news all you like, but don't call those who question their government unpatriotic.
Let me give away some national secrets: The nearby National Guard armory painted all their vehicles a nice "sand-duney" color; this about 3 weeks ago. We're going to war. The UN inspections have been a nice BS delay tactic; we certainly didn't want war to scare away Christmas shoppers, eh? Yee-haw, George! Git that oil! That'll show that Saddam! Send him to hell for planning to assassinate Daddy!
I just find it hard that you support the United States when you accuse it of intending to plant WMD. If the United States did stuff like that it would be as corrupt as those Middle East countries. That's the problem with the arguments from the left, they all seem to say that the US is causing all the problems in the world.
Let's review the Bush Admin integrity wrt Iraq. Bush said in the spring of 2002 that Iraq was next and we were preparing for Iraq b**** Slap part II, with or without the UN's approval. (Bush also stated in his election campaign that if elected he would take care of Saddam, when no mention of a terrorist link.) When publicly questioned about his rationale, he proceeded to tell huge bold face lies: Iraq is a terrorist state, Iraq is an emerging threat, Saddam has WMDs, those poor Kurds and Shiites, Saddam and Osama are buds, we won't attack if Saddam disarms, ad nauseum. Bush Admin, after two months of fruitless UN weapons inspections in Iraq, has finally started to release US intell to the UN inspection team, all the while looking to start the war in February. Clearly, the Bush Admin's intent is to not facilitate Iraq disarment. Their intent is to change the regime. Period. Given that central pretext for invasion is WMD, the US d*mn well better find them after whacking Saddam. This isn't just about loss of face. Not finding WMDs would be a death blow to his re-election bid. Given that the Bush Admin has not be forthright about the motivations for war, I don't see them changing, especially with the 2004 election in the balance. If push comes to shove, WMDs will be planted. I have no doubt.
