Explosive charges

All day yesterday John Kerry called Bush unbelievably incompetent, blind, stubborn, and arrogant for allowing 380 tons of explosives to disappear from Iraq— apparently in the last few months.

Once again, truth is the real casualty in the left’s war on the American Administration. As it turns out my posts are more accurate and less partisan than the NY Times.

BOMB-GATE [Cliff May] Sent to me by a source in the government: “The Iraqi explosives story is a fraud. These weapons were not there when US troops went to this site in 2003. The IAEA and its head, the anti-American Mohammed El Baradei, leaked a false letter on this issue to the media to embarrass the Bush administration. The US is trying to deny El Baradei a second term and we have been on his case for missing the Libyan nuclear weapons program and for weakness on the Iranian nuclear weapons program.” nationalreview.com

As I listened to the the news reports all day yesterday I heard: what, 380 pounds of explosives, why, Bush is incompetent, how, Bush is incompetent, and where, the wrong time, in the wrong place, in the wrong war, but when seems to have been purposely left to the imagination. The news reports based on this times article leaves one with the impression that these explosives were stolen in the last few months making it the embarrasing blunder Kerry trumpets. I cannot help but wonder why the most pertinent fact of this story was so misreported in all the reports in the media.

"This is one of the great blunders of Iraq and one of the great blunders of this administration." cnn.com

Actually it's one of the great blunders of the Kerry campaign and the media. Isn't it ironic that the man whose sole criticism of the Bush administration hangs on the tired accusation that Bush 'misled' the nation into war by using faulty intelligence that Kerry himself relied on to make the same case? Now Kerry is caught relying on the faulty reporting of the NYTimes to make his case against Bush in the closing days of this campaign. Kerry could not wait for the facts, showing that he has no integrity, no judgement, and no reason to argue that he could do a better, more effective, or smarter job than President Bush.

NBC News reported that on April 10, 2003, its crew was embedded with the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division when troops arrived at the Al Qaqaa storage facility south of Baghdad.

While the troops found large stockpiles of conventional explosives, they did not find HMX or RDX, the types of powerful explosives that reportedly went missing, according to NBC. cnn.com

Conclusion: Kerry and Edwards lied all day yesterday. If the explosives were gone before we got there they disappeared under the UN's watch of Saddam Hussein.

Mr. Edwards said less than one pound of the material was used to take down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, and larger amounts were apparently used in the bombing of a housing complex in November, 2003, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and the blasts in a Moscow apartment complex in September, 1999, that killed nearly 300 people.

The explosives could also be used to trigger a nuclear weapon, which was why international nuclear inspectors had kept a watch on the material, and even sealed and locked some of it. The other components of an atom bomb - the design and the radioactive fuel - are more difficult to obtain.

...John Edwards yesterday said President Bush's administration is "reckless and irresponsible" for failing to secure a huge weapons site in Iraq.

...Mr. Edwards said yesterday in Toledo that the American people need to know whether Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney "ignored this grave danger, and whether they made excuses about this grave incompetence." toledoblade.com

Are they making the case that we should have invaded earlier to secure these most dangerous of weapons? Are they really hyping the fact that Saddam already had tons of the, "most difficult to obtain components of nuclear weapons," and was waiting for sanctions to be lifted to get the easier to obtain parts?

But in the 1990s, the world was arrayed against him to deprive him of these weapons. So Hussein, the clever one, The Struggler, undertook a tactical retreat. He would destroy the weapons while preserving his capacities to make them later. He would foil the inspectors and divide the international community. He would induce it to end the sanctions it had imposed to pen him in. Then, when the sanctions were lifted, he would reconstitute his weapons and emerge greater and mightier than before.

The world lacked what Hussein had: the long perspective. Hussein understood that what others see as a defeat or a setback can really be a glorious victory if it is seen in the context of the longer epic.

Hussein worked patiently to undermine the sanctions. He stored the corpses of babies in great piles, and then unveiled them all at once in great processions to illustrate the great humanitarian horrors of the sanctions.

...France, Russia, China and other nations lobbied to lift the oil embargo. Hussein was, as the Duelfer report noted, "palpably close" to ending sanctions. sfgate.com

These are reports and information that Democrats ignore. That Saddam moved alot of these weapons in the year and a half that we spent trying to convince the UN and our allies, enthralled to the Oil-for-Food slush fund, to get serious about removing Saddam Hussein.

What we know is that if Kerry had been President Saddam Hussein would still be in power...

KERRY: Not necessarily be in power, but here's what I'll say about the $87 billion.... debates.org
Posted by Eric Simonson at October 26, 2004 10:25 AM