Monday, March 24, 2003
Only his hairdresser knows for sureSo, are they or aren't they? Ten or so missiles have been fired at Kuwait since the Gulf War restarted last week, and people keep debating what kind of missiles they are.
Kuwaiti officials have said some of the missiles were banned Scud missiles. But U.S. and British officials say they did not think the missiles were Scuds.That's interesting. Why are the US and British downplaying Iraqi actions, while the Kuwaitis are quick to accuse Iraq of violating UN sanctions? I assume the Kuwaitis are eager to justify to their fellow Arab countries that their support for the war is justified. But what's the motivation of the U.S.? Is it just because the US was burned over the Niger-uranium documents? Because the U.S. is suddenly being very circumspect:
GEN. FRANKS: Right. I think the -- I'll do my best. I think that we probably have received, oh, several handfuls of bits of information over the last three or four days about potential WMD locations. Some of them -- some of those locations are in areas where we have control, some we have not yet gone into. I think Secretary Rumsfeld gave the right appreciation yesterday when he said -- you know, we were then four days, we're now five days into this. And we're concerned about taking down this regime and about getting our hands on all these weapons of mass destruction and these technologies. And it's a bit early for us to have an expectation of having found them. And so, this is work we call SSE, sensitive site exploitation. And we will do some sensitive site exploitation as we go along and we'll do other sensitive site exploitation a bit later in the campaign. Best I can do.So, did this find turn out to be a dud? Or is it such a great discovery that we want to announce it dramatically to the world at just the right moment? Or, alternatively, perhaps it's mixed: maybe there are no substances stored at the site, but there are incriminating documents which need to be carefully studied.
Comments: Post a Comment