President Bush relied almost exclusively upon the top-secret 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq’s Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction for justification of his pre-emptive invasion of Iraq to "disarm" Saddam Hussein.
On the eve of the invasion, anyone – including Congressional leaders – having access to that top-secret document ought to have known that every significant assessment made in that NIE had been discredited by United Nations inspectors on the ground in Iraq.
But Bush invaded, anyway, and Congress didn’t try to stop him.
Of course, no Iraqi WMD were used against our troops. In fact, there didn’t seem to be any WMD in Iraq.
On July 13, 2003, the White House released "declassified excerpts" from the 2002 NIE on Iraq. It began:
"We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade."
Now everyone knew. Every significant assessment made in the NIE had been discredited in the years, months and weeks before the Bush-Blair invasion by UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq.
Nevertheless, a few weeks after the release, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet had this to say about his 2002 NIE on Iraq.
"We stand behind the judgments of the NIE as well as our analyses on Iraq’s programs over the past decade. Those outside the process over the past ten years and many of those commenting today do not know, or are misrepresenting, the facts. We have a solid, well-analyzed and carefully written account in the NIE and the numerous products before it.
"After David Kay and others finish their efforts – after we have exploited all the documents, people and sites in Iraq – we should and will stand back to professionally review where we are – but not before."
Well, David Kay, Charles Duefler and a cast of 1700 "others" have finished their billion-dollar efforts, having "exploited" all the documents, people and sites in Iraq. So, let’s "stand back" and "professionally review" what "Slam-Dunk" Tenet did that justified his Presidential Medal of Freedom.
The thousand-page Kay-Duefler "Comprehensive Report" of 30 September, 2004 is available at the CIA website, and it is well worth hours of your perusal.
Mostly what it does is confirm that the UN inspectors had got it right and the US National Intelligence Estimate had got it wrong.
But perhaps more importantly, the report confirms that as a result of the defection of General Hussein Kamil – the man in charge of all Iraqi WMD programs [and Saddam’s son-in-law] – to Syria and his subsequent "debriefing" by UN inspectors and the CIA, Saddam Hussein had a change of heart.
Saddam was desperate to get lifted the UN economic sanctions imposed in 1990. That meant complete cooperation with the UN inspectors, since the sanctions could only be lifted "upon Council agreement that Iraq has completed all actions" relating to "the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision" of all proscribed weapons programs and activities. Then, and only then, would "the prohibitions against the import of commodities and products originating in Iraq and the prohibitions against financial transactions related thereto contained in resolution 661 (1990)" be lifted.
Hence, Saddam ordered that serious attempts be made to submit accurate "full, final, complete disclosures" to the UN inspectors.
Scott Ritter, who was a chief UN inspector in Iraq in those years recently had this to say about the Duefler report:
"One of the tragic ironies of the decision to invade Iraq is that the Iraqi WMD declaration required by security council resolution 1441, submitted by Iraq in December 2002, and summarily rejected by Bush and Blair as repackaged falsehoods, now stands as the most accurate compilation of data yet assembled regarding Iraq’s WMD program\s (more so than even Duelfer’s ISG report, which contains much unsubstantiated speculation).
"Saddam Hussein has yet to be contradicted on a single point of substantive fact. Iraq had disarmed; no one wanted to accept that conclusion."
But, would it have made any difference to President Bush and the neo-crazies if every one had accepted that conclusion?
Probably not. When ABC’s Barbara Walters asked President Bush if the war – which was essentially based upon false "intelligence" – was "worth it" – Bush responded, “Oh, absolutely. Saddam was dangerous and the world is safer without him in power.”
