Were Saddam Hussein’s Chemical Weapons in Syria All Along?
There’s been a lot of debate over whether or not Syria has crossed Obama’s “red line” and used chemical weapons during its civil war.
It really doesn’t matter, because in typical fashion, this president has waffled and vacillated and decided to lead from behind, what you and I call following.
When Benghazi was under attack, he went to bed.
This is a man who cannot deal with making hard decisions that might make him look bad. How else do you explain all the czars that he named when he first took office. In essence, he named a bunch of people to do his job for him.
While the White House dallies and dithers, Israel has said Syria used chemical weapons, the UN said no, it was the rebels.
Who should we trust more? Israel, but Obama will trust the UN.
Now Turkey has stepped forward and said it was Syria who used the chemicals.
At this rate, Iran will have the bomb by the time they figure out whether Assad crossed the red line, blue line, yellow line or parked in the white zone.
What I don’t hear is this.
Remember back in 2003, during the run up to the Iraq War, Colin Powell went to the United Nations to show that Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons?
After the invasion, we never found large stocks of chemical weapons, which caused Michael Moore and his leftists to laugh and say that we were lied to, that we invaded for oil.
Reports and rumors began to surface that the chemicals weapons had possible been moved to Syria, Hussein’s only ally in the region.
The short lived New York Sun reported in 2005 that an Israeli General had gone on record saying that the WMDs were gone six weeks before the invasion in 2003.
There was conjecture that they had been moved elsewhere, like Iran or Jordan, but Iran was never friendly to Hussein, and Jordan really wanted to stay out of it.
Could it be that, even though he came out and said the intelligence was faulty, that W. was right all along? It’s not like Hussein didn’t know the invasion was coming. He was given plenty of warning, and kept promising to let inspectors in before changing his mind and keeping them out.
He could have bought the time he needed to get them out of there. After all, he had enough time to bury jets in the middle of the desert.
If it turns out that those were Saddam’s weapons, do you think that the left will feel foolish? No. They’ll just shrug their shoulders and say that Bush collapsed the economy.
Some media outlets have asked the question, but not the major news outlets, at least not that I’ve heard, and I am a news junkie. The Atlantic, a left leaning magazine, did pick up the story last summer, after Investor’s Business Daily ran an editorial suggesting these were Saddam’s weapons.
Being in the middle of a re-election campaign, all we heard about was Romney’s 47% remarks. It was more important that the media get the president re-elected than to show us that he is a lousy commander in chief, who cares little about those who work for him. If the shit hits the fan, the most important thing is that none of it gets on him.
George W. Bush was not the best president we ever had (and sometimes it shocks me how the right worships him almost a much as Reagan. Neither Bush measured up to the stature of Reagan), but hopefully he will be vindicated in the end.