Open Topic Sunday ... Documents: Part II
Thomas' first post of the day addressed a meeting between Saddam and his advisors. Not much was in it except that they were afraid of what might be found during the reign of Rolf Ekeus, the director of the UN Special Commission on Iraq. Ekeus, it was described, was a taskmaster on Iraq, and they had come clean with quite a bit of program notes and materials, but it was clear they were still hiding things. Materials, components, scientists, and facilities were spoken of, and each time there was a warning of what might happen if discovered. The conversation took focus of the embargo on Iraq, and it's potential lifting, but only if the Ekeus report passed through the Security Council. Of which a discussion was engaged over who on the Security Council they could make inroads with. Above all, Thomas' document chosen showed the machninations behind the scenes, and proved that Iraq was still hiding things.
Mine, however, has a bombshell admission in it that should give anyone interested in these documents a moment of pause. The document in question is another audio transcript. This one, however, does not focus on their relations within the confines of the Security Council. Towards the end of this (pages 10 & 11) the participants begin discussing a possible renewal of diplomatic relations with Iran.
Male18 Sir, about the Iranian representative, started to meet a few of the ministers; he’s showing his desire to improve the Iraq-Iran relationship. Comrade Tariq and I talked and discussed information about this subject, comrades Tariq’s idea was that the representative should know that his government is acting completely opposite from what he is saying, and we’ll see the reaction.
I directed the ones whom he wanted to meet, and this discussion happened.
Until now the representative is assuring the point of improving the relationship and the desire of the Iranian side to improve the relations.
The latest I got is, remember Sir, when the Prime Minister and I came back from Iran, and they issued invitations for the ministers.
The latest I got from the Health Minister, our health department that the Iranian Health Minister is asking to visit Iraq because he had a previous invitation. But because of the situation that we used to have he couldn’t before.
So they want their Health minister to visit. We looked at it, and we said we have no problem with it, if he wants to come, welcome. If he wants to come and meet with us, we have no problem with that.
The truth, Sir, now they’re trying in a way to contact us and improve their relationship with us, my opinion is yes, what you said about them conspiring against us is true, but that doesn’t mean we don’t take precautions and be aware when dealing with them, and at the same time we move to the Iranian side to at least have them on our side. This is my opinion. This is the information we have about the Iranian movements
Male 1 About Iran, I’m pointing out one thing, they are practical people, "Pragmatic", as Mr. Sa’dun Hammadi likes to call them. They noticed now that the Gulf countries are not taking care of them like they used to, the Gulf countries have America so they don’t need Iran any more, so the political side got weak, the friendship side. They don’t fear them any more either.
And the international level also, they made a big deal of Iran before, and now it slowed down, isn’t that so Comrade Tariq?
Tariq Yes, and they’re pressuring them about the Nuclear subject.
Male 1 Nuclear, and others…
Tariq They are talking about Iran just like they did with us in the beginning.
Male 1 In the beginning.
The other side, in their meetings, their ambassadors all over the world are telling them that the Islamic world by consensus is against them, I’m sure they do so because their stand about Iraq, and I’m sure they also tell them, the general Arabic consensus is against them too for the same reason.
So they do need a visit that would give the impression that they are trying to improve things with us. Of course they want that, its not going to hurt them, on the public side…
Male19 Inside and outside
Male 1 And it’s not harmful on the Islamic, Arabic, international and the non-aligned countries sides either. Not harmful is a title, but you know it is very helpful on the inside.
So we shouldn’t give them this unless we agree. In other words, when someone comes and visits, we tell them before the visit, what should we tell our people when you still have thousands being held by you? What should we tell our people when you have your borders? What should we tell our people about your latest silly conspiracy? So come on so we can agree and settle these things clearly; agree on each ones’ benefit and agree on all the steps. Lets not stay Iraqis, "do you know what I mean when I say don’t stay Iraqis?"
Male 20 Good people…
Male 1 That’s what I mean… we’ll tell them, "before you and I visit each other, lets agree on something," agree on something specific, your and our interests are clear, and we keep talking about the Prisoners of War, the war ended. What’s your explanation for keeping the old ones and taking the new ones? The military and the civilian planes? We can’t fly; we’ll bring it, will load it on a truck and bring it. Will dissemble the military planes to 4 peaces and bring it back, and civilian. Let it come back home. A truck will pull it all the way till it gets to Iraq. Once it’s inside Iraq we’ll deal with it.
The other reason for Iran to come our way is that Iran started to feel the dangers… they know that what’s going on in Iraq might happen to them. If they have something, missiles, technology, nuclear or other…That is where they’re going.
No one asked them or consulted with them when it came to the Madrid conference.
These are the issues.
Male 21 There are slowly growing changes in the area, but, one must know how to deal with it…
Bombshell does not even begin to cover this particular document. Iran and Iraq were talking, meeting with one another, and those in Iraq (I am guessing that the "Tariq" mentioned is Tariq Aziz, which makes this more than just a few peons talking about this; there is a member of Saddam's inner circle in this conversation). There are rumblings of Iran seeking a new alliance as all of their old ones fall apart. And it is key to note the tense of one of the statements above. "What's GOING ON IN IRAQ..." It notes that this is presently happening. Would this be shortly after the invasion? The date at the bottom of the pages is 2003. There is no discernable date anywhere else within the document, so I am speculating that this conversation happened shortly after the invasion.
A tactical alliance with Iran at that moment might have swamped us down. We already had Iranian terrorists crossing into Iraq to reinforce the al Qaeda presence there. And if the date is wrong and it is before the invasion, the move by the president to go into Iraq is further justified. We could not have allowed Saddam Hussein and the radical Islamicists in Iran to forge an alliance. The conversation does bring up the WMD question in regard to Iran. We already know that Iraq shipped much of its WMD materials and functioning weapons out of the country. The popular theory is that the items in question went to Syria. But there is further speculation as to where else they went. The amounts spoken of by General Georges Sada and Ibrahim al-Tikriti are more than Syria would want to hold onto.
Could they have shipped some of the materials off to Iran? It is a distinct possibility. If both nations were this cozy already, it is not within the realm of the unimaginable. They could have very well made it to Iran. In exchange for such materials, Iran could have agreed to unleash Hezbollah in Iraq to help the native insurgency and al Qaeda.
Of course, this is speculation. A theory that seems to fit the pieces in play right now within this document. It is my opinion that the alliance being sought would have made an invasion of Iraq--if the alliance had been sealed through a treaty--a fool's move. The reason behind that is that Iran would have had no problems attacking our troops with chemical and biological weapons. They have their own stockpiles of those sorts of weapons. Which brings me to the "Health Minister" in question. Why would a healt minister want to see officials from Saddam's government? Would be an attempt to acquire some of the WMDs; a possible "business deal?" I am also reminded, at this point, of Muqtada al Sadr. Was he really an "exile" from Iran, or was he there to help negotiate with Iraq?
These documents, while valuable, seem to garner more questions right now than answering them. But this one in particular shows that the Hussein regime seemed ready to bury the hatchet with Iran, kiss, and make-up. That is one of the scariest ideas to ever come from that region. Two nations with WMD capabilities joining forces against America--their common enemy. After reading this, I sleep better at night knowing that we went into Iraq. We very well may have stopped the alliance before it could gain any solid traction.
The Bunny ;)
Thomas' first post of the day addressed a meeting between Saddam and his advisors. Not much was in it except that they were afraid of what might be found during the reign of Rolf Ekeus, the director of the UN Special Commission on Iraq. Ekeus, it was described, was a taskmaster on Iraq, and they had come clean with quite a bit of program notes and materials, but it was clear they were still hiding things. Materials, components, scientists, and facilities were spoken of, and each time there was a warning of what might happen if discovered. The conversation took focus of the embargo on Iraq, and it's potential lifting, but only if the Ekeus report passed through the Security Council. Of which a discussion was engaged over who on the Security Council they could make inroads with. Above all, Thomas' document chosen showed the machninations behind the scenes, and proved that Iraq was still hiding things.
Mine, however, has a bombshell admission in it that should give anyone interested in these documents a moment of pause. The document in question is another audio transcript. This one, however, does not focus on their relations within the confines of the Security Council. Towards the end of this (pages 10 & 11) the participants begin discussing a possible renewal of diplomatic relations with Iran.
Male18 Sir, about the Iranian representative, started to meet a few of the ministers; he’s showing his desire to improve the Iraq-Iran relationship. Comrade Tariq and I talked and discussed information about this subject, comrades Tariq’s idea was that the representative should know that his government is acting completely opposite from what he is saying, and we’ll see the reaction.
I directed the ones whom he wanted to meet, and this discussion happened.
Until now the representative is assuring the point of improving the relationship and the desire of the Iranian side to improve the relations.
The latest I got is, remember Sir, when the Prime Minister and I came back from Iran, and they issued invitations for the ministers.
The latest I got from the Health Minister, our health department that the Iranian Health Minister is asking to visit Iraq because he had a previous invitation. But because of the situation that we used to have he couldn’t before.
So they want their Health minister to visit. We looked at it, and we said we have no problem with it, if he wants to come, welcome. If he wants to come and meet with us, we have no problem with that.
The truth, Sir, now they’re trying in a way to contact us and improve their relationship with us, my opinion is yes, what you said about them conspiring against us is true, but that doesn’t mean we don’t take precautions and be aware when dealing with them, and at the same time we move to the Iranian side to at least have them on our side. This is my opinion. This is the information we have about the Iranian movements
Male 1 About Iran, I’m pointing out one thing, they are practical people, "Pragmatic", as Mr. Sa’dun Hammadi likes to call them. They noticed now that the Gulf countries are not taking care of them like they used to, the Gulf countries have America so they don’t need Iran any more, so the political side got weak, the friendship side. They don’t fear them any more either.
And the international level also, they made a big deal of Iran before, and now it slowed down, isn’t that so Comrade Tariq?
Tariq Yes, and they’re pressuring them about the Nuclear subject.
Male 1 Nuclear, and others…
Tariq They are talking about Iran just like they did with us in the beginning.
Male 1 In the beginning.
The other side, in their meetings, their ambassadors all over the world are telling them that the Islamic world by consensus is against them, I’m sure they do so because their stand about Iraq, and I’m sure they also tell them, the general Arabic consensus is against them too for the same reason.
So they do need a visit that would give the impression that they are trying to improve things with us. Of course they want that, its not going to hurt them, on the public side…
Male19 Inside and outside
Male 1 And it’s not harmful on the Islamic, Arabic, international and the non-aligned countries sides either. Not harmful is a title, but you know it is very helpful on the inside.
So we shouldn’t give them this unless we agree. In other words, when someone comes and visits, we tell them before the visit, what should we tell our people when you still have thousands being held by you? What should we tell our people when you have your borders? What should we tell our people about your latest silly conspiracy? So come on so we can agree and settle these things clearly; agree on each ones’ benefit and agree on all the steps. Lets not stay Iraqis, "do you know what I mean when I say don’t stay Iraqis?"
Male 20 Good people…
Male 1 That’s what I mean… we’ll tell them, "before you and I visit each other, lets agree on something," agree on something specific, your and our interests are clear, and we keep talking about the Prisoners of War, the war ended. What’s your explanation for keeping the old ones and taking the new ones? The military and the civilian planes? We can’t fly; we’ll bring it, will load it on a truck and bring it. Will dissemble the military planes to 4 peaces and bring it back, and civilian. Let it come back home. A truck will pull it all the way till it gets to Iraq. Once it’s inside Iraq we’ll deal with it.
The other reason for Iran to come our way is that Iran started to feel the dangers… they know that what’s going on in Iraq might happen to them. If they have something, missiles, technology, nuclear or other…That is where they’re going.
No one asked them or consulted with them when it came to the Madrid conference.
These are the issues.
Male 21 There are slowly growing changes in the area, but, one must know how to deal with it…
Bombshell does not even begin to cover this particular document. Iran and Iraq were talking, meeting with one another, and those in Iraq (I am guessing that the "Tariq" mentioned is Tariq Aziz, which makes this more than just a few peons talking about this; there is a member of Saddam's inner circle in this conversation). There are rumblings of Iran seeking a new alliance as all of their old ones fall apart. And it is key to note the tense of one of the statements above. "What's GOING ON IN IRAQ..." It notes that this is presently happening. Would this be shortly after the invasion? The date at the bottom of the pages is 2003. There is no discernable date anywhere else within the document, so I am speculating that this conversation happened shortly after the invasion.
A tactical alliance with Iran at that moment might have swamped us down. We already had Iranian terrorists crossing into Iraq to reinforce the al Qaeda presence there. And if the date is wrong and it is before the invasion, the move by the president to go into Iraq is further justified. We could not have allowed Saddam Hussein and the radical Islamicists in Iran to forge an alliance. The conversation does bring up the WMD question in regard to Iran. We already know that Iraq shipped much of its WMD materials and functioning weapons out of the country. The popular theory is that the items in question went to Syria. But there is further speculation as to where else they went. The amounts spoken of by General Georges Sada and Ibrahim al-Tikriti are more than Syria would want to hold onto.
Could they have shipped some of the materials off to Iran? It is a distinct possibility. If both nations were this cozy already, it is not within the realm of the unimaginable. They could have very well made it to Iran. In exchange for such materials, Iran could have agreed to unleash Hezbollah in Iraq to help the native insurgency and al Qaeda.
Of course, this is speculation. A theory that seems to fit the pieces in play right now within this document. It is my opinion that the alliance being sought would have made an invasion of Iraq--if the alliance had been sealed through a treaty--a fool's move. The reason behind that is that Iran would have had no problems attacking our troops with chemical and biological weapons. They have their own stockpiles of those sorts of weapons. Which brings me to the "Health Minister" in question. Why would a healt minister want to see officials from Saddam's government? Would be an attempt to acquire some of the WMDs; a possible "business deal?" I am also reminded, at this point, of Muqtada al Sadr. Was he really an "exile" from Iran, or was he there to help negotiate with Iraq?
These documents, while valuable, seem to garner more questions right now than answering them. But this one in particular shows that the Hussein regime seemed ready to bury the hatchet with Iran, kiss, and make-up. That is one of the scariest ideas to ever come from that region. Two nations with WMD capabilities joining forces against America--their common enemy. After reading this, I sleep better at night knowing that we went into Iraq. We very well may have stopped the alliance before it could gain any solid traction.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 12:58 AM
1 Comments:
Holy cow. Let's see... WMDs, an alliance with Iran, an alliance with the Taliban and Osama... it sure sounds like we hit them before the fit really hit the shan, doesn't it?
Post a Comment
<< Home