Saddam Hussein after his capture. Saddam Hussein after his capture.

Saddam Hussein had WMD after all

Ten years ago, the Grand Coalition of the Willing invaded Iraq and took it over. Eventually US forces found Saddam Hussein in a “spider hole,” brought him to trial, convicted him, and executed him. But they did not find the “weapons of mass destruction,” or WMD, they were sure Saddam Hussein had.

Everyone remembers the anti-propaganda campaign that followed: “Bush Lied; People Died!”, “General Betray-Us,” et cetera ad nauseam. A few voices, most notably that of Sean Hannity, insisted that Saddam Hussein did have WMD, but had someone truck them out of Iraq and into Syria. Last night, a retired general came forward to vindicate Hannity, Bush, and yours truly, among others.

What we knew about Saddam Hussein and WMD

Saddam Hussein certainly had WMD many years before Operation Iraqi Freedom. He used them on Kurdish towns and villages in northern Iraq. (Incidentally that’s the one part of Iraq that has stayed relatively calm lately.) The suffering of those villagers prompted the Northern No-fly Zone during the Clinton administration. It also prompted then-President Bill Clinton to say that Saddam Hussein had to go.

To make the case for war in 2002 and 2003, General Colin Powell and others told the United Nations Security Council that the US Air Force had evidence of an active chemical-biological warfare program in Iraq. Among other things, Powell showed the UN diagrams of mobile laboratories, built into truck trailers, for mixing chemical and biological weapons in the field. (You cannot mix chemical or biological WMD in advance. You must mix them fresh and use them right away, or they are useless.)

Saddam Hussein after his capture.
Saddam Hussein, following his capture by the US 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, December 13, 2003. Photo: United States Navy

The UN itself sent several inspection teams to Iraq to look for these weapons. Saddam Hussein threw up one excuse after another, mainly by designating many buildings as “Presidential palaces.” Now one may well believe that Saddam Hussein was vain enough to have a lot of palaces. But some of these were more like weapons depots than official residences and office buildings.

President Bush himself told Congress that Saddam Hussein bought large shipments of uranium from Africa. This was the strongest evidence anyone saw ahead of time that Saddam Hussein sought to develop nuclear weapons.

All this drove a consensus that Iraq was, to all intents and purposes, at war, or getting ready to go to war, with the civilized world. So on March 21, 2003, the world struck the first blows.

After defeating the forces loyal to Saddam Hussein, US forces searched for the WMD and the nuclear program. And to all appearances, they found – nothing. Or almost nothing. In fact they did recover three of those mobile laboratories – broken down in the desert. The wind-driven sands had damaged them beyond repair.

Every society has those within it who believe war is inherently evil, and pre-emptive war has no excuse. They seized on this seeming lack of evidence. So began an anti-propaganda campaign – propaganda for a purpose opposite the usual ones.

The most prominent retorts to this campaign did not come from the Bush administration, nor even from the Republican Party. It came from Sean Hannity. He, more than anyone else, said Saddam Hussein had someone, probably the Russians, move his WMD stocks to Syria. (Why Syria? Because Bashar al-Assad, like Saddam Hussein, is a Baathist.) This Google search shows how the political left, and anti-war independent voices (both old and new), dismissed Sean Hannity’s claims. “A proven liar” is the mildest epithet his critics threw at him (and the only one that does not need a Parental Judgment and Discretion Advice).

Sean Hannity’s critics each worked from one or both of two motives:

  1. To discredit the Republican Party and help the Democratic Party return to power.
  2. To declare that war, for any cause, is never just.

About the latter: Randolph Bourne famously said,

War is the health of the State.

Ron Paul ran a whole Presidential campaign from that quote, and variations on that theme.

Syria has WMD. Where did they get them?

[ezadsense midpost]

The first cracks in the wall of denial came last year. In July of 2012, Sean Hannity had Liz Cheney as a guest on his TV show. (Alan Colmes left the show several years ago.) Hannity repeated his claim, and Liz Cheney backed him up: Saddam Hussein had WMD, and shipped them out to Syria before the bombs burst over the skies of his capital city. (See the embedded clip.)

Ho ho, haw haw, said the deniers.

Then, earlier this week, someone – we do not yet know who – launched a chemical attack on some civilians in Aleppo.

Aleppo is the largest city in Syria. Bashar al-Assad has lost control over it. And when the story broke, Assad’s mouthpieces said the rebels had used chemical weapons against those people.

Last night, Major General Paul Vallely USA (retired) gave this interview to WorldNetDaily. (See also this video.) First, he said the Assad regime attacked the people of Aleppo with chlorine gas, and tried to frame the rebels for it.

Then he said the Assad regime has used WMD against their people last summer – and he, General Vallely, has seen the photos that prove it.

Now you know why Sean Hannity and Liz Cheney said what they said, when they said it.

And then he said:

If you go back to January through March of 2003, we had intelligence in the Defense Department that the Russians helped move, by convoy, a lot of the chemical and biological weapons into two locations in Syria and one in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon. We think Russia and Iran have enhanced their inventory. The vast majority of those chemical and biological weapons were from Iraq

That’s almost exactly what Sean Hannity has said all this time. And more: the Russians and the Iranians helped themselves to some of those chemical and biological weapons. Are these what Iran’s leaders threaten to use against two Israeli cities if they come under attack?

So why didn’t our forces find them? General Vallely addressed that, too (emphasis added):

After the takedown of Saddam in 2003, there was a big survey done by U.S. forces all throughout Iraq. Basically, as far as I know, all of the bio and chemical weapons had been moved. They found semblance of a growing nuclear development program, but it was not an aggressive program by any means. So the fact is that he had them, used them on his own people. He knew he had to get them out of there, and there was a big cover-up and deception in how he moved them over there. We did know about them, but the Bush administration never came forth and explained to the American people that situation.

Why didn’t the Bush administration come out and say, “The Russians moved them into Syria”? General Vallely has no idea. This will go down in history as one of the worst public-relations blunders of the Bush administration: deliberately covering up for the Russians and the Iranians. He probably did it to keep the Russians from issuing veto after veto in the Security Council.

And where is now the deniers’ case? Can they deny anymore that Saddam Hussein had WMD and shipped most of his “stuff” out to Syria and the Bekaa Valley? The only reason Saddam Hussein didn’t get nukes is that he didn’t try hard enough. He got the uranium, but didn’t have the centrifuges to enrich it.

Our de facto President knows perfectly well what he will have to do. (If he doesn’t, the Israelis will do it for him.) History will record he was against war in the Middle East before he was for it.

The anti-war independent community won’t forgive him. But they’ll need another argument. They’ll have to move from “Saddam Hussein never had WMD” to “So what?” And they know that will be a much harder sell. (Though if they’re smart, they’ll admit that yes, external enemies do exist. Sometimes they’re just as dangerous as the internal enemies they fear more.)

And everybody in this disgusting affair owes Sean Hannity an apology.

UPDATE: Welcome readers of ConservativeByte.com, and kudos also to Victoria Jackson!

[ezadsense leadout]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Editor-in-chief at | + posts

Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.

election, Middle East, military, politicians, president, terrorism, United Nations, war


Terry A. Hurlbut

Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.

Comments (30)

  • “Major General Paul Vallely USA (retired)”

    As you didn’t mention when he (retired) I will. 1993. So from where, exactly, did he get all this knowledge about what was happening in 2003?

    I’m not going to comment on Maj Gen Vallely’s service record, but since retiring he’s started making some comments that are… eccentric. He’s not quite at the stage of changing his name to Jack D. Ripper and lecturing about precious bodily fluids, but he’s definitely heading in that direction.

    “After the takedown of Saddam in 2003, there was a big survey done by U.S. forces all throughout Iraq.”

    Yes, and it found damn all. I know. Unlike Maj Gen (ret’d) Vallely I was there.

  • Well, I’m not going to comment, either, on whether General Jack D. Ripper, were he alive today, might have plenty of things to complain about, with perfect justice. Nor on whether society merely took decades to vindicate his warning about adding hydrofluoric acid to municipal water systems.

    I will merely observe that, since sharing this article on Sodahead, I have received ample corroboration of General Vallely’s report, in the form of fond memories of reports coming out of Iraq in the days leading up to the invasion, of convoys streaming into Syria. I’ll let you guess what those convoys were carrying.

  • “Why didn’t the Bush administration come out and say, “The Russians moved them into Syria”? General Vallely has no idea”

    The answer’s simple. Allegations are not evidence, and no one has produced any actual, objective evidence showing that WMD materials in Syria, Russia and Iran had their origin in Iraq.

    When the U.S. accused Iran of providing materials to the Iraqi insurgency, they were able to back it up by collecting fragments of the components from attack site, which were unmistakably Iranian in origin.

    No such “smoking gun” evidence of Iraqi WMDs has ever been produced, and chlorine gas was not one of the grave threats being touted by Bush, Cheney and the rest. Chlorine is certainly not a weapon worthy of almost 4,800 military deaths and thousands more injured.

    But Mr. Vallely makes his living as a consultant, and being paid to appear on Hannity’s show to say things that would appeal to both Hannity and his audience is a sensible move for him. No evidence is required, and he can just allege and insinuate to earn his check.

    • General Vallely would be a poor consultant indeed if, as you insist, he kept saying things that were not true.

  • Then I see we have agreement on something. He’s not a good consultant at all if he can’t provide hard evidence as well as speculation. He hasn’t, so his lack of competency speaks for itself.

    • He has corroboration. Since I published this essay, all manner of corroborators have stepped forward. Can’t you read the other comments?

  • It seems clear that Vallely’s statement is pretty meaningless as he left the military ten years prior to the invasion. You defend your article’s journalistic integrity by claiming that “all manner of corroborators have stepped forward” “in the form of fond memories of reports coming out of Iraq in the days leading up to the invasion, of convoys streaming into Syria”

    Who are these corroborators? What are their credentials? Is there some sort of report to provide evidence for their narrative or are these just random people on the internet?

  • “Is there some sort of report to provide evidence for their narrative”

    No.

    Exhaustive searches of Iraq found no WMDs and very strong evidence that the programmes had been shut down in the mid to late 1990s. Syria’s own chemical weapons capability long predates 2003 and was set up during the Cold War, probably with Soviet assistance. They had no need of anything from Iraq.

    • Then why didn’t Saddam Hussein say so? And why did he put on an act with certain missiles he wanted to get rid of?

      “Needed” and “could use the stock” are not the same thing. You have not shown that Syria could never have benefited materially from the delivery of Saddam’s WMD stocks to Syrian territory.

  • Why would Saddam even transfer weapons to Syria? The two countries were not really on too great of terms since Syria contributed troops to the coalition during the Gulf War.

    The only CIA source on the WMDs (named “Curveball”) admitted that he made up the whole thing. All Iraqi documents recovered post-invasion show that Saddam gave up on the program in the mid-90s. Officials from the USA. Britain, Denmark, Iceland, and others have all found zero evidence for any chemical or nuclear weapons in Iraq, other than some leftovers from the Iran-Iraq war (which, by the way, were funded by western nations including the United States).

  • I don’t know what to believe on this. All I know is that the US government lied on too many occasions to be trusted.

    How hard is it for the CIA to pull off planting evidence to make people think anything. They made 9/11 look pretty easy and they used every possible technique to muddy the waters, playing public ego like a symphony. Heck, I have a genius IQ and I believed the government’s “conspiracy theory” for ten years. It only took a few hours of looking at the evidence to overcome my unwitting bias.

    Like the devil, they’ve become masters of manipulation, using Problem-Reaction-Solution on everything from GMOs to the Iraq War.

    America is now a Fascist country — a perfect melding of Corporate Party and government, sidelining the needs of individual citizens, only playing to those needs in order to leverage more manipulation. Now that I see it for what it is, it’s quite clever and almost beautiful in an evil, sinister kind of way.

    Bush = Obama! Two heads of the same evil beast.

    If you don’t believe 9/11 was an inside job, check out the evidence at http://AE911Truth.org. Thousands of scientists, engineers and architects have come together to conduct a new investigation into 9/11 and have found damning evidence proving controlled demolition. And since it takes months to prepare buildings of that size, 9/11 could only have been an inside job. And since the CIA was a tenant of 7WTC and the Bush family ran the security company that oversaw WTC, we’re left with only one conclusion: Bush and the CIA knew about the preparations. I really don’t think they’re that incompetent.

    • The major problem with that analysis: it leaves out the obvious motive that the Muslims have for such a depredation. “Fight and slay the infidels wheresoever ye find them” – it couldn’t be any clearer.

      The other part is that someone would have had to build those buildings that way from the beginning. Otherwise, the many, many other tenants would surely have noticed.

  • “Syria has WMD. Where did they get them?”

    They made them, of course. Making non-persistent nerve agents is difficult (but definitely possible) if you’re doing it at home. For a medium-sized state it’s trivially easy.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.



© All Rights Reserved. Conservative News and Views.

Back to Top