The Republicans are in a win/win situation -if- they seize control of this story.
If the New York Times story is correct (as I said below) that means George Bush invading Iraq saved us from a Saddam having nuclear weapons TODAY.
If the New York Times story is wrong, this is yet another attempt by the media to use a bogus news story to sway the election. (Dan Rather, Al Qaqaa)
My fellow Republicans -all of you- bloggers, talk show hosts, pundits, cable news guests, elected officials etc; now is not the time to play defense. If you have to make a comment on this today, hit them and hit them hard.
If the New York Times wants to pull a November Surprise and try to sink Republicans, I can think of no better outcome then to have it backfire because they provided us proof Saddam was a year from developing a nuclear weapon.
Remember, offense, offense, offense. This only helps us -if- we help ourselves.
Related Update: I’ve read just about every word in the blogosphere on this story and this is the best post for laying the whole thing out on the table.
D-Hoggs, If you are so morally weak that you need 6,000-year-old mythology to guide you through life, then god bless you, but I do not need a burning bush to tell me how to lead a positive and productive life.
I know you don’t barney, you just need some whiney ass liberals to tell you that you can’t play tag on the playground anymore. Pussy.
if they were less than a year away, there would be a large amount of physical evidence lying around in Iraq: various sub-systems in various stages of completion or testing, manufacturing facilities, material, etc.. you don’t go from plans on paper to a bomb in a year, if you’ve never done it before.
so, where’s all the physical evidence ?
Paul,
The question you posed to Lee way up in this thread was illegitimate. Rather I should say that one of the possible answers was illegitimate.
George W. Bush did not keep Saddam from getting nuclear weapons in any way. Just didn’t happen.
That capacity was destroyed in the early 90’s, and pressure was applied and maintained to keep him from reconstituting that program.
The real credit for keeping Saddam from getting nuclear weapons belongs to George Herbert Walker Bush, Bill Clinton, and the International Atomic Energy Agency and it’s inspectors like Scott Ritter.
If you’re really curious about this bit of history, I recommend you pick up Scott Ritter’s book.
John
cleek: “you don’t go from plans on paper to a bomb in a year, if you’ve never done it before.”
March 1944…construction completed on research laboratory in Los Alamos, NM. Scientists begin arriving to attempt to design the FIRST atomic bomb in history…not knowing for certain if it is even possible!!
16 months later…July, 1945: having used sliderules and NUMBER TWO PENCILS the scientists succeed in construction the world’s atomic bomb.
FROM SCRATCH!! With ZERO modern fabrication technigues, unproven theories and unknown results.
cleek…you were saying??
Wow! Wizbang is a parody site? Sort of the new Scrutator?
Hilarious!
A simple lesson in reality, not that it should get in the way of Paul’s favorite theories:
1. The documents are pre-1991 and reflect the pre-1991 nuclear program, which was advanced.
2. The facts concerning the pre-1991 program were fully explored by the mid-90s, including the possibility that Saddam was an estimated year away from nuclear capability — these documents do not reveal anything new.
3. The 2003 war, per Cheney, was justified in part because Iraq had allegedly reconstituted its nuclear program. The alleged nuclear threat was probably the biggest boost for justifying the war, and the one that was most deliberately false.
4. No evidence of any kind was discovered post-2003 to support the notion that the Iraqi nuclear program had been reconstituted in the years prior to the 2003 war. No labs, scientists, other personnel, equipment, documents, nothing, nada (unless you are a believer in the “fairies flew it all to Syria” argument, for which there is also no evidence, but at least that fantasy explains why there is no evidence — the pinnacle of psychotic thinking).
Now, in a vain effort to resuscitate the brain dead argument that war in 2003 was necessary to prevent a nuclear Saddam, right wingers induce the Bush administration to post millions of unvetted documents on the web so that the ‘Army of David’ can do their Frankenstein work in order to revive the Saddam nuclear monster.
That careless posting results in sensitive pre-1991 nuclear records, conveniently written in Arabic, being made available to any jihadi with nuclear ambitions. Normal people think that is a bad thing.
But right wingers think this proves that the war was justified.
Look, liberals already understand that you don’t need a good reason to advocate for war and cheerlead for the Bush administration. Don’t hurt your head any more by trying to make these documents serve that purpose. It just makes you look silly.
Question to all the rear end smuchers, re-liberals and “mun-go”(what ever he calls himself)—If we had let Saddam alone, wonder what he would be doing right now? Hmmmmm
dmbeaster, if, as you say, “The facts concerning the pre-1991 program were fully explored by the mid-90s…these documents do not reveal anything new” then why would posting these documents hurt anything? You can’t have it both ways kerry.
Di-Hoggs:
Do you seriously need your question answered? Do you not understand the difference between public confirmation in the 90s of the pre-1991 nuclear program and public disclosure of the technical details of pre-1991 bomb making plans as shown on these documents?
There are details of the 1945 bomb designs (the berylium/polonium nuetron initiator being one of the most sensitive ones) that remain classified even today. Yet there are libraries full of books about the Manhattan Project. Does that mean that it would therefore be harmless to release that classified info re the 1945 bomb design?
Hope that helps.
_______________
If we had let Saddam alone, wonder what he would be doing right now? Hmmmmm
Probably still writing bad novels, playing with his mistresses, oppressing his people and green with envy that Bush let N. Korea have the bomb instead of him. After all, from 1991 to 2003, he did not attempt to restart a nuclear program. That we do know.
Muirgeo, Hugh, BarneyG2000 and Lee have written hundreds of thousands of words on Wizbang and other conservatives blogs. They have accomplished absolutely nothing, just like the rest of their sorry lives, nothing accomplished and never will be, other than prove the failure of the entire liberal education system.
dmbeaster, I assume the dm stands for dumb. Who gave North Korea the two Nuclear reactors? Wasn’t that Madam NotAllTooBright drinking a toast to Crazy Kim? Didn’t she work for Slick Willie? To top it off Slick and Algore gave or sold him the plans for a nuclear bomb. Wipe after you sh** such garbage as you are doing. You stink. Are you over 15 years old so you have an excuse not to remember 8-9 years ago, because you were still in diapers?
So another Clinton associate dies under mysterious circumstances in South Beach in Miami. What is that, over 50 dead Slick and the Weasel associates?
Rusty said: “Muirgeo, Hugh, BarneyG2000 and Lee have written hundreds of thousands of words on Wizbang and other conservatives blogs. They have accomplished absolutely nothing,…”
We, along with thousand of other american democrats, have helped change the course American policy with the election of Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
What did you accomplish, Scrappy? I’d say you helped make our task easier by proving repeatedly that the party in power is powered by ignorant lunatics.
And for that, in behalf of muriego, Hugh, Brian, Barney, and the rest of the brave liberals I say thanks, Scrapiron.