Don wrote on Jun 14, 2008 5:37 AM:I will comment on the letter from Bill Wasley today. As far as I know the claim that we said we were in "imminent nuclear danger from Iraq" in 2003 is a distortion by antiwar activists. It was set up as a straw man so they could attack it as untrue. The more immediate danger was the amount of deadly nerve gas anthrax he was believed to be hiding. Several pickup trucks loaded with containers of weaponized anthrax would be enough to kill millions of people. The amount that a person could carry, say in thermos bottle and spread in any city by two or three people could lead to tens of thousands of persons being killed. It was openly known that Saddam was paying a large sum of money to the families of suicide bombers going into Jewish territory.
It was believed that Saddam’s favorite weapon was the deadly VX. It was verified by the US and UN inspectors after the war main hostilities ended that Saddam had labs set up and personnel trained to manufacture it. When sprayed as a mist and breathed it is quickly and painfully fatal. A very small amount could be fatal to a large population. Just a drop on one’s skin, if not immediately washed, off is fatal It is widely known that in the first gulf war Saddam sent his low quality scud missiles into Israel even though they were not a part of the coalition attacking to recover Kuwait from Saddam’s brutal occupation. It was widely published that even BEFORE the 2003 war UN inspectors found modern longer more accurate missiles that could reliably reach in to the cities of Israel. It had been forbidden for him to have missiles of that range. These are only a few of the reasons Saddam was considered a serious threat. His large army that could attack any of his neighbors, including Saudi Arabia was also a threat.

Don wrote on Jun 14, 2008 6:16 AM:Bill Wasley claims Israel has very good military intelligence. I understand they believed Saddam had WMD too, as did the intelligence agencies of England, Russia, and other countries. Now it is excused by some that he did not really have them, but went to nearly unbelievable extremes to make it look like he did have while verbally denying it. By this I mean actions like before the war keeping the UN inspectors detained at the front gate to suspected facilities while many trucks were loaded up and driven out the back gate. This was documented by news reports at the time. Remember that shortly before the 2003 war, the inspectors demanded to use a couple of helicopters so they could go by surprises to the sites they selected and have a helicopter to watch from overhead that no trucks or cars should drive out while they were inspecting, but Saddam refused to let them.
Would that be fiction? I think not. From my own experience I have worked at an American army base in a foreign country years ago that had secret papers and specially trained high-ranking officers who were to direct the activities of several hundred thousand troops if West Germany were to be invaded by the Russians in the early days of the cold war. It was close enough to Russian lines that if they decided to invade they could get there in two hours. We had specially marked files and boxes of things to load into special trucks that were parked nearby 24/7 exclusively for a real evacuation if needed. We could be loaded and gone within an hour after a siren blew. Several times a year unannounced drill evacuations were held where we loaded up the trucks and drove off waiting for further directions. So what Saddam’s agents were doing was realistic and convincing regardless of whether the boxes and things they were loading into trucks and driving away had real secret material or were fakes. We may never know. Some people think he really had those WMD plans and projects underway, and others think he was carrying on a charade to make himself feared by his neighboring countries. It is a little hard to tell because the first few Iraqi scientists we questioned were murdered hours after they talked to our investigators. From then on the Iraqi scientists refused to be interviewed by us alone, only with several others along.

And yet Don wrote on Jun 14, 2008 12:01 PM:But for Britain, none of the nations that were sure Saddam was a serious threat apparently felt strong enough about it to join us in our invasion. So many nations, all closer to Iraq than we are, decided not to buy it. And it was Bush who TOLD the inspectors to leave even though they said things were going well. How come? I, for one, don't buy the hindsighted excuse-making for Bush and Blair. You don't do a war unless you're sure, because a war is about the worst thing humans do to one another. Just about every one of our allies wasn't sure. They were right. Bush was wrong. Thousands are dead. No excuses. It was an historic, tragic, and immoral blunder.

snerd wrote on Jun 14, 2008 12:11 PM:You might try reading the book "Hubris" it is a factual account of how the Bush administration twisted intelligence to suppost their desire to attack Sadam.

Roberto wrote on Jun 14, 2008 10:38 PM:I don't buy all the hype about Obama...but ask yourself this question....Who do you want in charge to deal with world affairs and terrorism, a unknown senator or a world leader like McCain?

Dave wrote on Jun 15, 2008 8:00 AM:@ Don: you don't remember Condoleezza Rice's threat of "a mushroom cloud?"

To John Kahler wrote on Jun 15, 2008 8:39 AM:The vault is actually in the 1 story building next to Rosa's. It is inside the art store next door.
Please go down to Rosa's and read the historical plaque on the wall if you would like some history on the corner lot which Rosa's now occupies. Prior to being a parking lot in the 70's there was a building there which served many uses over the years.