Hans Blix: War Planned Long in Advance
 

War planned 'long in advance'
09/04/2003 21:25 - (SA)

Print article email story


Madrid - The invasion of Iraq was planned a long time in advance, and the United States and Britain are not primarily concerned with finding any banned weapons of mass destruction, the chief UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, said in an interview on Wednesday.

"There is evidence that this war was planned well in advance. Sometimes this raises doubts about their attitude to the (weapons) inspections," Blix told Spanish daily El Pais.

"I now believe that finding weapons of mass destruction has been relegated, I would say, to fourth place, which is why the United States and Britain are now waging war on Iraq.

Today the main aim is to change the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein," he said, according to the Spanish text of the interview.

Blix said US President George W Bush had told him in October 2002 that he backed the UN's work to verify US and British claims that Baghdad was developing biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.

Washington 'less convinced now'

But he said he knew at the time "there were people within the Bush administration who were sceptical and who were working on engineering regime change". By the start of March the hawks in both Washington and London were getting impatient, he added.

Blix said that he thought the US might initially have believed Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction - although its "fabrication" of evidence raised doubts about even that - but that Washington was now less convinced by its own claims.

"I think the Americans started the war thinking there were some. I think they now believe less in that possibility.

But I don't know - you ask yourself a lot of questions when you see the things they did to try and demonstrate that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons, like the fake contract with Niger," he explained.

That was a reference to US allegations - later denied - that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium from the west African state of Niger.

"I'm very curious to see if they do find any (weapons)," he said.

Blix said the war, which on Wednesday entered its 21st day, was "a very high price to pay in terms of human lives and the destruction of a country" when the threat of weapons proliferation could have been contained by UN inspections.

By attacking Iraq, Washington had sent the wrong message - that if a country did not possess biological, chemical or nuclear weapons, it risked being attacked.

US sending out the wrong signal

"The United States maintains that the war on Iraq is designed to send a signal to other countries to keep away from weapons of mass destruction.

But people are getting a different message.

Take the announcement North Korea has just made. It's tantamount to saying 'if you let in the inspectors, like Iraq did, you get attacked'.

North Korea accused the United States on Sunday of using a UN Security Council discussion of its nuclear programme as a "prelude to war" and warned that it would fully mobilise and strengthen its forces.

"It's an important problem," Blix continued.

"If a country perceives that its security is guaranteed, it won't need to consider weapons of mass destruction. This security guarantee is the first line of defence against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."

The 74-year-old Swede announced in March that he would step down from his post when his contract runs out in June.

Blix's reputation for independence and resisting political pressure was sorely tested as the Iraq crisis unfolded and US officials became exasperated with his measured reports on Iraqi cooperation with his inspection teams.



Hans Blix: War Planned Long in Advance

Yes, the man in charge of years of failed inspections, who along with his teams of inspectors, was time and again harrassed and embarrassed by Saddam and who time and again failed to fulfill his role or make any progress is truly an unbiased source of information.

He's pissed because he and his work are now moot.

SpaceAce

Of COURSE this war has been planned for. duhh.

The US military is known for planning ahead and strategizing out all sorts of conflict scenarios and war possibilities. That's what the US taxpayers PAY them to do.... to be ready when they need to be ready.

Again... duh.

This sort of commentary from Mr Blix comes as no surprise whatsoever.

I think he is more pissed because he now realizes that the US played him and the UN like pawns. They knew Iraq had no WMD but were hoping that Saddam would treat the inspectors like he did in 1998 (after the CIA admitted using UN inspectors for spying) - and kick out the inspectors. Unfortunately for the US, Saddam did not kick out the inspectors and let them see whatever they wanted to see. When it became apparent that the truth would come out, that Iraq's WMD had all been destroyed, the US invaded anyway and changed their tune to "free the Iraqi people".

Is that we, the American people, pay the military to do? To invent false stories about another country and then invade it for oil?!

If we want to take out WMD, let's invade Pakistan or Israel.

If we want to "liberate" millions of people, let's have Operation Congolese Freedom.

If we want oil, then we did the right thing - invade Iraq.

Iran, Saudi Arabia and Iran are coming up...

Well that explains evrything, he was a contractor so he got paid hourly! No wonder he wanted another 12 years of inspections...:glugglug

Good. The North Korean economy is already in shambles and the famine continues. Just how much more of their production can they poor into maintaining their military?

Reagan applied the same principle to the Soviet Union. The cold war arms race made them spend more and more of their economic outpot on arms until they collapsed from the inside out.

Apply just enough pressure to keep them nervous...

The "false stories" are actually facts, they are not false at all as recent events have proven, and it is not "all about oil" either.

The rest of your post isn't worth addressing.

They are pawns. The UN serves no purpose but to advance the causes of its members. If the members couldn't manipulate the UN to their ends, they wouldn't belong.


You really do orbit your own private planet, don't you? You inhabit some mysterious parallel universe where Saddam cooperated.

SpaceAce

You are accusing the UN to have bias?
And you don't think he was just as harassed by the US?

And what "years of failed inspection" are you refering too? The inspections began again in October last year.

More informed posts as usual ....

Darn those Iranians lets invade them twice!!!

I think it is you who inhabits the parallel universe. This last time that the inspectors were let into Iraq, Saddam and Co cooperated 100%, even letting the inspectors make surprise visits to Saddam's palaces. They started destroyed the al-samoud missiles. Where was the non-cooperation these last few months?

The US was virtually 100% certain that Saddam would act like he acted in the past, making life difficult for the inspectors. But he did not this time around. Instead he let them see whatever they wanted to see. When the US realized this, they started to fabricate intelligence reports, including the one which accused Iraq of trying to buy uranium from Niger - the CIA eventually admitted it was forged but did not know where it came from.

Do some reading of your own before accusing me of being uninformed. The only reason inspections "stopped" is because Saddam was being so "cooperative". By your own words, they "started again". Just because there was a lull in the work doesn't mean it didn't stretch across years. Don't waste your time playing semantics games with me.

SpaceAce

What false stories about WMD materials. General Franks said that there are up to 3000 suspected sites to be inspected. Thus far 15 have been inspected. 11 buried labs were just discovered. What will be the final result?

All that needs to be said is: HA! He jerked them around hundreds of times. "No, you can't go in there. Look over here instead. There's no weapons! You have no right to inspect this building." On the eve of destruction he gave the tiniest bit of cooperation and pretended to suddenly, after years (despite what extreme says) of dicking around, allow access to one or two places that he knew IN ADVANCE were on the list and had plenty of time to sterelize. He fucked around and lost, it's that simple. He played the game for a long time but in the end he just didn't have the staying power.

SpaceAce

No way.

Are you trying to say that for 12 years Saddam dicked around and didn't cooperate like he was supposed til it became apparent the US was sick of his screwing around and was preparing for war?

I, for one, am shocked.

No he did not let the inspectors do their job...at least to according to Hans and his reports to the UN.

Oh, yeah, and "You can't take pictures, give us the camera, no filming allowed."

"We have nothing to hide."

Pfft.

SpaceAce

The buried labs were no surprise as UN inspectors had investigated those in the past.

The final result is that the coalition forces will find one measley shell with mustard gas or maybe just a hot dog with mustard on it and then Bush will be impeached for lying to the American people and the world.

Actually, instead of being impeached he will change his story and say that the US was after that illegal hot dog to begin with. All he has to do is say that over and over again and let CNN and Fox News replay it and the American people will eventually believe him and think that the cause was just.

Hans Blix was appointed in 2000. So his first inspections started in October 2002.
This means that he had no failed inspections at all behind him.

And the rest of your original post was just your interpretation on how things were and thats pretty irrelevant.

Correct Hans Blix hasn't been leading or working on the UN
inspection team prior to 2000. Nor did any of the members
who were part of inspection team after the previous group
got kicked out after 1991

DynaMite :2 cents:

Twix is a fucking retard.

2 for me, none for him!

Provide a link please where the Inspectors knew about these 11 buried labs?

It doesn't matter if he was appointed February of this year. He is now redundant, moot, unneeded. It doesn't matter if there were 50 before him, it doesn't change the fact that this has been going on for years.

As to my interpretation of events, it's easily as valid and relevant as yours or wontons.

SpaceAce

Bush accuses Syria of having chemical weapons. What did I predict on this board just last week? An invasion of Syria is coming up:



Bush turns the heat up on Syria (From BBC News)

Reported on MSNBC on TV just yesterday. You will have to contact them for a transcript.

MSNBC IS PROPAGANDA! IT'S ALL LIES MANUFACTURED BY THE GOVT! THE GOVT FORCES MSNBC TO REPORT WHAT IT WANTS TO AND WONTON FELL FOR IT!

Don't you ever get tired of calling MSNBC, ABCNEWS, and FOXNEWS propaganda and lies only to have to refer to them to back up anything you say?

You seem to be missing the point entirely, which is not surprising. The art of propaganda is to SPIN THE TRUTH, no blatantly broadcast all-out lies. You are a typical case study as to why propaganda works. Too bad you didn't live in Germany circa 1935. You would have fit in as a model citizen. Wait a minute...actually you live in a time and place which is not all that far off.

Congratulations model citizen FatPad!!

:thumbsup

That is strange...since the General just announced it today.

HAHA

You missed my point entirely. But I'm not surprised.

It's funny watching you bleat about how a news source is biased, lies, and reports what the govt wants it to when they report something you disagree with, only to turn around and refer to it the next day when they report something you do agree with.

Good job! You're the only person I've ever seen do that with a straight face. :thumbsup

Please show me EVEN ONE POST where I say that any US media outlet broadcasts blatant lies. Show me!!

What I have said, time and time again, is that the GOVERNMENT will lie and then the media will simply report "The government said so and so.." without any critical investigation. THAT is the art of propaganda. All the major newspapers in Germany did the same thing for Hitler.

Go to the library and read some books. Or better yet, go to college and takes some courses on the history of media.

It doesn't matter what you say now. The <B>fact</B> is that out of one side of your mouth, you tell people what they hear in the media is bullshit and out of the other you point directly to that same media machinery to back your own points.

Here's a newsflash for you: just because they report something that fits your personal opinions doesn't make it true and just because they report something you don't agree with doesn't make it false.

SpaceAce

I don't need to know the history of the media to sit here and watch you tell everyone that anything they learn from CNN is govt sponsored propaganda when it goes against anything you agree with, call people brainwashed sheep who watch CNN, and then turn around the next day and use CNN to backup something you believe when they agree with you.

Like I said, it's funny. :) It's even funnier that you think you don't do that.

CNN IS ALL SHIT! DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING ON IT!

LOOK AT WHAT CNN SAYS ABOUT THIS! I TOLD YOU I WAS RIGHT ABOUT THIS!

*DISCLAIMER* The above two lines are not intended be direct quotes from Wonton. He has not stated them as such, although I do think they summarize his past posts on news sources like CNN, MSNBC, and Foxnews rather well.

Hans Blix made it very clear that Iraq wasn't cooperating in full. His first report was really a scathing blast of the Iraqis. His next two were a little better but he made it clear that they were no in full compliance.

I say them all. Not once did he say that Iraq was in full compliance. Not once. And I think we can safely say that Blix, and Al Baridi were no mouth piece for the US.

I love it.

It's all lies...... until I need them to prove a point. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Anyways, your schizophrenic view of the major media news is irrelevant. I just found it funny that you referred to MSNBC in your post after all the times you called them propaganda and said people who watched MSNBC were brainwashed sheep.

Carry on talking about poor Hans Blix and Saddam Hussein.

Can you show me (or all of us, rather) the evidence that Iraq has destroyed their WMDs? Oh and what about the mobile chemical labs found today? And how many resolutions did Iraq fail to complete? :thumbsup

Yeah, and with the deficit spending bush and the repubs are running up the usa may collapse the same way. If you think thats a ridiculous statement take a look at the debt they are just starting to pile up and ask yourself how long we can do that. Remember that most of their tax cuts for the rich are yet to kick in and they want more.

Interesting. You have put sentences in quotes, implying that I said these things when in fact I never have. In other words, you are slandering me.

FATPad starts his own propaganda machine right here on GFY...

How many UN resolutions has Israel failed to comply with?

If we went by UN resolutions, Israel would be #1 on the list.

I will remove the quotes just for you Baghdad Wonton.

The US has plans to invade every country on the globe - Including all of our allies.

fuck him

So many people have been railing and crying against the US and the "pre-emptive nature" of the war for so many weeks, all mostly without facts backing up their arguments. Imagine for a second what the world would have been like during the years 1939 to 1945 if the US and the UK + all other allies had of gone against Hitler in a pre-emptive manner, like Bush is against Saddam.

Think about it.

While Hitler is gaining power, stockpiling weapons, tanks, subs, planes, size of army etc, the world goes in and removes him from power. WW II isn't fought across 3 continents but on German soil ONLY. THINK of the savings in lives that would have made.

Is saddam equal to Hitler? Maybe not, but he has certainly shown Hitler-like traits over the years, and I for one am very happy that we won't ever have to find out just how far ol' Saddam would have gone with his power trip.

Newspapers have libraries of obituaries of people who are still alive, just to be prepared, but it doesn't follow that the newspapers intend to kill anyone. I wouldn't be surprised if the US had "plans" to invade Brazil or The New Seychelles as well just in case they were ever needed.

And if the emphasis has changed to ousting Saddam Hussein, who is complaining? Certainly not the Iraqis.

Someone already said it, but it bears repeating.

The US military has plans to invade everyone. Even places like Canada, Mexico, Australia and Great Britain, and I doubt we're going to be attacking any of them anytime soon.

While I don't like the deficet spending one bit, it is needed here. Btw it's only 2-3% of our GDP so it's not going to bankrupt the US that is a little far fetched to say the least.

Churchill called WWII the avoidable war for that very reason. While the allies were appeasing, Hitler was amassing. Buy the time they realized it, it was way too late.

It's sort of like a pre-nup. Having a prenup means being prepared in case of a divorce, not planning on getting one.

From the US financed "thintank" NEW AMERICAN CENTURY


This letter focusing on the first war of the 21st century was sent 9 days after 9/11. So yes, the inspection process thru the UN was smoked blown from a stinking asshole in american brainwashed faces.!


http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm

September 20, 2001

The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President,

We write to endorse your admirable commitment to ?lead the world to victory? in the war against terrorism. We fully support your call for ?a broad and sustained campaign? against the ?terrorist organizations and those who harbor and support them.? We agree with Secretary of State Powell that the United States must find and punish the perpetrators of the horrific attack of September 11, and we must, as he said, ?go after terrorism wherever we find it in the world? and ?get it by its branch and root.? We agree with the Secretary of State that U.S. policy must aim not only at finding the people responsible for this incident, but must also target those ?other groups out there that mean us no good? and ?that have conducted attacks previously against U.S. personnel, U.S. interests and our allies.?

In order to carry out this ?first war of the 21st century? successfully, and in order, as you have said, to do future ?generations a favor by coming together and whipping terrorism,? we believe the following steps are necessary parts of a comprehensive strategy.


For Iraq:

For Syria: