It's Bush vs. the CIA on Iraq

It's Bush vs. the CIA on Iraq
by David T. Pyne, Esq., Columnist and Legal Analyst

Risky US Plan to Invade Iraq Could Result in Thousands of Casualties

Second in a Series

November 21, 2002

Columnist David Pyne Pres. Bush and his supporters in Congress have striven to convince the American people of the pressing need to invade Iraq because Saddam "might" be training terrorists to attack the US or because he "might" be planning on using weapons of mass destruction (WMD). However, the horrifying Sept. 11 attacks should have taught us that a lot of other unsavory people in the world are far more likely to attack the US than Saddam Hussein. That a country 'might' be building WMD or 'might' be preparing to attack us is a weak rationale for engaging in unprovoked attacks against that country, let alone an all-out invasion. Administration hawks qualify their accusations because they have no evidence that Iraq is aiding terrorists. Nor do they have any evidence to support their theory that Iraq is planning an attack on the US with WMD. At a recent national security conference in September, Gen. Anthony C. Zinni stated that uncertainty over Iraq's weapons isn't a sufficient reason to attack. He concluded, ``In other words, we are going to go to war over another intelligence failure.''

In fact, George Tenet, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, conclusively debunked the administration's theories on Iraqi intentions. In a letter to the Senate dated Oct. 7, Tenet stated that "Iraq appears to have drawn a line in the sand" against launching terrorist and/or WMD attacks against the United States. However, he added, Iraq would likely be much less restrained if the US were to launch an invasion. Apparently the CIA does not believe that Saddam poses an imminent threat to the United States. However, if the US invades Iraq, Bush's warnings may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. In addition, both Tenet and Czech President Vaclav Havel have said that there is no evidence that the much-publicized Prague meeting between al Queda agent Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi official, which constitutes the only alleged link between Iraq and Al Queda, ever happened.

The truth is that there is no evidence that Iraq has never even attempted any terrorist attacks on US soil, a fact conveniently overlooked by the Bush administration. Furthermore, in its continuing attempt to justify invading Iraq, the administration is beginning to overreach and invent grievances out of whole cloth, or rely on testimony of dubious credibility. A recently released White House paper entitled "A Decade of Deception and Defiance," cited by Bush's speech before the UN General Assembly in which he wrongly stated that Iraq was "sheltering" the Abu Nidal terrorist organization. This charge ignored the verifiable fact that the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) had assassinated Abu Nidal earlier this summer. Nidal was responsible for killing 900 innocent people, including over 100 Americans. The administration used Nidal's death as an occasion to strongly condemn Saddam for sheltering him, even though Saddam had summarily executed Nidal months before. That seems at least as disingenuous as when the Reagan administration blamed Iran for the 1987 missile attack which disabled the USS Stark and killed scores of American sailors.

Iraq has little if any capacity to attack the US using either WMD or conventional means. Even if Saddam possessed the ability to deliver such weapons to US territory, he knows that such the resulting retaliation would topple his regime or land him in a grave. The prudent US policies of deterrence and containment that helped restrain Soviet aggression and win the Cold War have proven very successful in containing since his unprovoked aggression against Kuwait in 1990. There is no reason to believe that a strategy of deterrence based on the US ability to deliver thousands of nuclear weapons to any target in the world, will not continue to work against Saddam even if he were to succeed in developing a crude atomic weapon, or several for that matter.

At the September conference, retired Marine four-star generals Anthony Zinni and Jack Sheehan stated their belief that Saddam can easily be contained. Gen. Zinni, former Commander-in-Chief-US Central Command, stated his belief that the same strategy that defeated the Soviet Union would work equally well to contain Iraq, which has been securely 'in the box' for nearly a dozen years now. Gen. Sheehan criticized the administration's stated willingness to take on Saddam without international support and without fully developed battle plans.

Saddam had weapons of mass destruction during Operation Desert Storm as well as several dozen anti-ship, yet use neither against an invading US Army. Given the fact that Saddam refrained from using his best weapons against either the US military or his neighbors even when confronted with a massive US invasion of his country, it is extremely unlikely that he will use them against another country in the future unless the US invades Iraq again, this time with the objective of capturing or killing Saddam. As Brent Scowcroft and others have stated, Hussein is a survivor and is developing WMD primarily to deter attacks against his own country, not for offensive purposes. ***

David T. Pyne, Esq. is a national security expert who serves as President of the Center for the National Security Interest, a pro-defense, national security think-tank based in Arlington, VA. He has served as a Country Program Director in the Department of Defense responsible for the countries of the former Soviet Union, the Middle East and Latin America and has traveled as a member of Department of Defense-led delegations to Canada, South Africa, Israel, Brazil and Argentina. Mr. Pyne is a licensed attorney and former Army Reserve Officer. He holds an MA in National Security Studies from Georgetown University. Mr. Pyne also serves as Executive Vice President of the Virginia Republican Assembly. Mr. Pyne was recently interviewed on Howard Phillips' Conservative Roundtable TV program. Mr. Pyne serves as a columnist for American-Partisan.com , OpinioNet.net and America's Voices. He is also a regular contributor for Patriotist.com. In addition, his articles have appeared on Etherzone.com, Sierratimes.com, OriginalDissent.com and AmericanReformation.org where he serves as a national security policy analyst. He has been cited in the New American Magazine and was recently interviewed on Howard Phillips' Conservative Roundtable TV program.

Republication and distribution encouraged with copyright notices intact.