Wikileaks proves Iraq had WMDs

Found this info on HotAir, which mentions specifically the barrels of mustard gas & the mortar rounds full of Sarin and mustard gas we found in Iraq in 2004.

This doesn’t surprise me at all.  I mean, the whole world knew Saddam not only had WMDs, but had also used them on his own people.  At the time of the Iraq invasion, there was plenty of evidence that WMDs existed, but that evidence was buried by the media.  So why didn’t the government do a better job of telling us this stuff?  Because if there was one thing GW sucked at, it was presenting his case to the public.  I distinctly rememberr being highly frustrated with the man and his admin over this point.

Ed Morrisey wraps up his article with this brilliant observation:

This isn’t exactly vindication of one of the arguments the Bush administration gave for invading Iraq, which was that Hussein had already begun stockpiling new WMDs and was working on nuclear weapons, but it is another vindication of the primary reason for restarting the war: Hussein and Iraq had violated the truce and refused to comply even after 17 UN resolutions demanding compliance. Hussein never had any intention of abiding by the truce, for whatever motivations one wants to assign to him. After the invasion, the US proved (through an armed-version of Wikileaks in Iraq’s diplomatic files) that the UN had allowed Hussein to grab billions in personal wealth by perverting the embargo in the Oil-for-Food Program, which would have given Hussein the means to fuel another WMD program as soon as the West withdrew from Iraq, and to restart Hussein’s dreams of pan-Arab dominance through military adventurism. In the end, there were no good options.

via Wikileaks documents show WMDs found in Iraq « Hot Air.

Filed under “DUH!”

In Iraq, though, most people worry that with the departure of the U.S. military, which many consider a necessary evil, violence will shoot up once again. Iraq’s army and police are still fledgling forces backed by the U.S., and political parties, dueling ethnic groups and rival branches of Islam are vying for power, encouraging neighboring states to interfere.

Iraqis — and some U.S. military and intelligence officers and diplomats — think that different factions are counting the days until the Americans leave, aware that Iraqi forces aren’t strong enough to fend off major violence. Iraqi forces still lack air power or sufficient logistical support and struggle to unite under a fractious government. Iraqi forces have turned to their American allies in the face of major battles.

“The situation in Iraq will improve only if the Americans and the Iraqi politicians withdraw from Iraq,” said Abbas al Dulaimy, 31, as he walked through Baghdad. “The situation will soon be worse because the politicians will look out only for their interests like those who demand to divide Iraq . . . it will be chaos.”

The status of forces agreement between the Iraqi and U.S. governments signed late last year will reduce boots on the ground as well as U.S. influence on Iraqi matters. The first major test comes in June, when U.S. troops are to withdraw from Iraqi cities.

Americans may assume that once forces leave, the U.S. military will no longer be responsible for what happens in Iraq. Many Iraqis think, however, that the U.S. hasn’t prepared their nation to secure itself.

“The Iraqi army and police can’t achieve stability in Iraq when the Americans withdraw unless the Americans correct the matter,” said Usama al Najafi, a Sunni parliament member from the secular Iraqi National List, referring to corruption and sectarian and party loyalties within the security forces.

via Is the Iraq war over? Iraqis, Americans see it differently | McClatchy.