Powell: Iraq Evidence May Have Been Wrong

[MrBrau1]

Powell: Iraq Evidence May Have Been Wrong

BY BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) has conceded that evidence he presented to the United Nations (news - web sites) that two trailers in Iraq (news - web sites) were used for weapons of mass destruction may have been wrong.

In an airborne news conference on the way home from NATO (news - web sites) talks in Brussels, Belgium, Powell said Friday he had been given solid information about the trailers that he told the Security Council in February 2003 were designed for making biological weapons. But now, Powell said, "it appears not to be the case that it was that solid."

He said he hoped the intelligence commission appointed by President Bush (news - web sites) to investigate prewar intelligence on Iraq "will look into these matters to see whether or not the intelligence agency had a basis for the confidence that they placed in the intelligence at that time."

Powell's dramatic case to the Security Council that Iraq had secret arsenals of weapons of mass destruction failed to persuade the council to directly back the U.S.-led war that deposed the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites). But it helped mobilize sentiment among the American people for going to war.

As it turned out, U.N. inspectors were unable to uncover the weapons, but administration officials have insisted they still might be uncovered.

David Kay, who led the hunt for the weapons, showed off a pair of trailers for news cameras last summer and argued that the two metal flatbeds were designed for making biological weapons.

But faced with mounting challenges to that theory, Kay conceded in October he could have been wrong. He said he did not know whether Iraq ever had a mobile weapons program.

Powell told reporters that as he worked on the Bush administration's case against Iraq U.S. intelligence "indicated to me" that the intelligence was solid.

"I'm not the intelligence community, but I probed and I made sure, as I said in my presentation, these are multi-sourced" allegations, Powell said.
The trailers were the most dramatic claims, "and I made sure that it was multi-sourced," he said.
"Now, if the sources fell apart we need to find out how we've gotten ourselves in that position," he said.

"I have discussions with the CIA (news - web sites) about it," Powell said, without providing further details. The trailers were the only discovery the administration had cited as evidence of an illicit Iraqi weapons program.

In six months of searches, no biological, chemical or nuclear weapons were found to bolster the administration's central case for going to war: to disarm Saddam of suspected weapons of mass destruction.



No shit. I respect Powell. Why he works for Bush Jr. is beyond me.

[Dorian Gray]

that's crazy...

edit: thank god some can admit they might have been wrong

[Diemen]

Well it's about damn time they admit this.

[Klaus]

"Now, if the sources fell apart we need to find out how we've gotten ourselves in that position," he said.

exactly!

[verte76]

I agree, it's about damn time they admitted this. They didn't do themselves any favors by not doing so.

[STING2]

It is not a surprise nor a revelation that various pieces of intelligence turned out not to be true. That happens all the time with intelligence and is the nature of intelligence.

The fact remains that Saddam failed to VERIFIABLY DISARM of all WMD and that was the administrations central case for military action and was supported by UN resolutions 678, 687, and 1441.

[BVS]

Then why present this information to begin with? They obviously thought they needed to...

[STING2]

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Then why present this information to begin with? They obviously thought they needed to...

The information was supportive of the need to act but it was not the central case for action.

[Salome]

personally I always thought that whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction was secondary to the fact that Saddam was the leader of an extremely cruel regime and therefore IMO needed to go

the allies surely never presented it this way though
unless I'm mistaken it was always about the immediate threat Saddam was for the rest of the world because of the weapons Iraq supposedly had
and the evidence about these weapons were used as the reason why we should now finally follow up on several UN resolutions


personally I think this war was a just one
but I could completely understand it when those who had doubts about this war in the first place now feel like they were deceived

[Dorian Gray]

Originally posted by Salome
personally I always thought that whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction was secondary to the fact that Saddam was the leader of an extremely cruel regime and therefore IMO needed to go

the allies surely never presented it this way though
unless I'm mistaken it was always about the immediate threat Saddam was for the rest of the world because of the weapons Iraq supposedly had
and the evidence about these weapons were used as the reason why we should now finally follow up on several UN resolutions


personally I think this war was a just one
but I could completely understand it when those who had doubts about this war in the first place now feel like they were deceived

my thoughts exactly...
it's good to see though that the administration is taking a step in the right direction, and admitting that they may have been mistaken. it's good for America

[STING2]

Originally posted by Salome
personally I always thought that whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction was secondary to the fact that Saddam was the leader of an extremely cruel regime and therefore IMO needed to go

the allies surely never presented it this way though
unless I'm mistaken it was always about the immediate threat Saddam was for the rest of the world because of the weapons Iraq supposedly had
and the evidence about these weapons were used as the reason why we should now finally follow up on several UN resolutions


personally I think this war was a just one
but I could completely understand it when those who had doubts about this war in the first place now feel like they were deceived

Achieving Verifiable Disarmament of Saddam had been an ongoing process for nearly 12 years. Everything short of the use of military force to remove Saddam had been tried in achieving verifiable disarmament. All of these attempts failed which is why military force to remove Saddam from power became a necessity in order to insure disarmament.

[BrownEyedBoy]

hmm...ya think?

[Salome]

Originally posted by STING2


Achieving Verifiable Disarmament of Saddam had been an ongoing process for nearly 12 years. Everything short of the use of military force to remove Saddam had been tried in achieving verifiable disarmament. All of these attempts failed which is why military force to remove Saddam from power became a necessity in order to insure disarmament.

doesn't really change though that the people we have voted for to represent us made every effort to convince us that immediate action was nesecary based on evidence that now - almost certain - turns out to be false

[STING2]

Originally posted by Salome
doesn't really change though that the people we have voted for to represent us made every effort to convince us that immediate action was nesecary based on evidence that now - almost certain - turns out to be false

Thats incorrect. Their central case for the removal of Saddam was his failure to verifiably disarm of all WMD per UN Security Council Resolutions.

[Dreadsox]