Why did Saddam act like he was hiding WMD?

Goldstein

Gatherer.Of.Data
Apr 4, 2003
378
6
41
Visit site
✟8,048.00
Faith
Agnostic
(I apologize for making this my 4th thread on the front page, but I thought this story was interesting enough to make one.)

The explanation that Saddam's aide gives is so obvious I'm surprised I didn't think of it myself. :wave:

Aide: Saddam Did Get Rid of Iraq WMD
Aide Says Saddam Did Get Rid of Weapons of Mass Destruction but Kept World Guessing About It

The Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq Aug. 1 —

A close aide to Saddam Hussein says the Iraqi dictator did in fact get rid of his weapons of mass destruction but deliberately kept the world guessing about it in an effort to divide the international community and stave off a U.S. invasion.

The strategy, which turned out to be a serious miscalculation, was designed to make the Iraqi dictator look strong in the eyes of the Arab world, while countries such as France and Russia were wary of joining an American-led attack. At the same time, Saddam retained the technical know-how and brain power to restart the programs at any time.

Both Pentagon officials and weapons experts are considering this guessing-game theory as the search for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons continues. If true, it would indicate there was no imminent unconventional weapons threat from Iraq, an argument President Bush used to go to war.

Saddam's alleged weapons bluff was detailed by an Iraqi official who assisted Saddam for many years. The official was not part of the national leadership but his job provided him daily contact with the dictator and insight into the regime's decision-making process during the past decade and in its critical final days.

The official refused to be identified, citing fear of assassination by Saddam's paramilitaries who, he said, remain active throughout Iraq. But in several interviews, the former aide detailed what he said were the reasons behind Saddam's disinformation campaign which ultimately backfired by spurring, rather than deterring a U.S. invasion.

According to the aide, by the mid-1990s "it was common knowledge among the leadership" that Iraq had destroyed its chemical stocks and discontinued development of biological and nuclear weapons.

But Saddam remained convinced that an ambiguous stance about the status of Iraq's weapons programs would deter an American attack.

"He repeatedly told me: 'These foreigners, they only respect strength, they must be made to believe we are strong,'" the aide said.

Publicly Saddam denied having unconventional weapons. But from 1998 until 2002, he prevented U.N. inspectors from working in the country and when they finally returned in November, 2002, they often complained that Iraq wasn't fully cooperating.

Iraqi scientists, including those currently held by the U.S. military, have maintained that no new unconventional weapons programs were started in recent years and that all the materials from previous programs were destroyed.

Both Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair have come under fire in recent weeks as weapons hunters come up empty and prewar intelligence is questioned.

The White House acknowledged recently that it included discredited information in Bush's State of the Union speech about alleged Iraqi attempts to purchase uranium - a key ingredient for nuclear weapons.

More importantly, no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons have been found.

Before the invasion, the British government claimed Saddam could deploy unconventional weapons within 45 minutes. The Bush administration insisted the threat was so immediate that the world couldn't afford to wait for U.N. inspectors to wind up their searches. Despite the warnings, Iraqi troops never used such weapons during the war.

Intelligence officials at the Pentagon, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said some experts had raised the theory that Iraq put out false information to persuade its enemies that it retained prohibited chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

"That explanation has plausibility," said Robert Einhorn a former assistant secretary of State for nonproliferation. "But the disposition of those missing weapons and materials still has to be explained somehow."

Iraq's claims that it destroyed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons materials could never be verified by U.N. inspectors who repeatedly requested proof.

However, U.N. inspectors, who scoured Iraq for three and a half months before the war, never find any evidence of renewed weapons programs.

"The longer that one does not find any weapons in spite of people coming forward and being rewarded for giving information, etc., the more I think it is important that we begin to ask ourselves if there were no weapons, why was it that Iraq conducted itself as it did for so many years?" Hans Blix, the former chief U.N. weapons inspector, told The Associated Press in June.

Saddam's aide suggested the brinkmanship ultimately backfired because U.S. policy switched in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, from containing the Iraqi leader, to going after those who could supply terrorists with deadly weapons.

He described Saddam as almost "totally ignorant" of how Western democracies functioned and attributed his failure to grasp the impact of Sept. 11 to the fact that he increasingly surrounded himself with yes-men and loyalists who were not qualified to give him expert advice on economic, military or foreign policy matters.
 

Doctrine1st

Official nitwit
Oct 11, 2002
10,007
445
Seattle
Visit site
✟12,523.00
Faith
Politics
US-Others
There's no question that Saddam is not firing on all cylinders. I read in Time awhile back that during the first war, his plan was to capture US soldiers and then strap them to the front on their armored vehicles thinking that the US would not fire on them. And when his commanders criticized the plan as in how are they are going to first capture the soldiers, he was disposed of.

That's the problem when you're a ruthless diabolical dictator, there's no room for constructive criticism, and brain storming sessions are whatever you think.

D1st
 
Upvote 0

SUNSTONE

Christian Warrior
Sep 2, 2002
8,785
213
49
Cocoa Village
Visit site
✟18,200.00
Faith
Non-Denom
datan said:
so is this the latest excuse why the WMDs have not been found (so many I've lost track)?

"He tricked us! He made us believe he was lying when he was telling the truth"

Nope, same old excuse we have always been using.

This is a lose lose situation for him.
If he tricked us, and actually didn't have the weapons, then he is dumber than I thought. He should be the star of dumb and dumber 2!
 
Upvote 0

Nelzador

At the music heist, I met the gourmet man with alu
Jan 1, 2003
835
0
Away
✟976.00
Saddam achieved a great deal in the war. Even if he maintained that he had weapons, it brought the US into a war and therefore cemented their presence in the Middle East even more and did enough to ensure the gulf between Arab states and Israel remained as wide as it's ever been. Sure, he's lost a country and will probably get captured (if he's not already dead), but you can argue that he achieved almost exactly what the US didn't want after the first Gulf War and that was to be sat around for years policing a country. Saddam is an expert in playing the psychological warfare game.
 
Upvote 0
Had he revealed that he had no WMD and very poor defence capabilities, he would have opened himself up to attack from, primarily, the Kurds and the Shi'ites.

I'm no Saddam supporter, the guy was an awful tyrant - but think about it for a minute, folks. Get some knowledge of the social, religious and political dynamics of the area.

Not everything is about Israel or America, y'know.
 
Upvote 0
From here:

The foreign element, Bremer said, includes al-Qaida and Ansar al Islam, a militant Islamic group that U.S. and Kurdish forces attacked in northern Iraq during the war but is now believed to be restructuring.
Two things are most worrisome, one intelligence official said: Many of the foreign fighters appear to have been trained in terrorist or guerrilla tactics, and none of them appears intent on restoring Saddam to power. Most of the foreigners, in fact, are Islamic militants who cheered the fall of the secular Iraqi regime, the official said.
Saddam had enemies much, much closer that Israel or the US. Those were the people he had to watch out for; and those were the people he needed to lie about having WMD's for, to protect himself.

He may well have dreamed of leading an army into Jerusalem, but that's all it was - a dream. There was no way he could fulfil that dream. The best he could do was keep the Islamic Militants and the Kurds at bay by making them believe he could seriously retaliate should they attack - which they have always wanted to.

As for your portrayal of an Imperial Iraq, I really think the USA has far greater imperialist ambitions.

Saddam - wicked creature that he may be - did not have the capacity to be an imperialist.

I'd dig up more resources for your enlightenment, but it's way past my bedtime - maybe tomorrow - depends on how much homework I have to do after college.

If you like though, you could perhaps use the time to find some resources to back up your claim of Saddams dream to march into Jerusalem? I'd be interested to do some reading about that.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SUNSTONE

Christian Warrior
Sep 2, 2002
8,785
213
49
Cocoa Village
Visit site
✟18,200.00
Faith
Non-Denom
lunachick said:
Had he revealed that he had no WMD and very poor defence capabilities, he would have opened himself up to attack from, primarily, the Kurds and the Shi'ites.

I'm no Saddam supporter, the guy was an awful tyrant - but think about it for a minute, folks. Get some knowledge of the social, religious and political dynamics of the area.

Not everything is about Israel or America, y'know.


Well if your going to get the snot kicked out of ya, I guess picking it done by USA, wasn't a bad choice.
If your a cockroach, would you want to be stepped on, or sprayed with raid?
 
Upvote 0