{1} If Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction had really existed, was it obvious that an invasion would increase the risk of those WMD ending up in the hands of terrorists?

{2} If there had been Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq before the war in 2003, as the Bush Administration assured the world, they were very well hidden, and only a small group of Iraqis would have known their location. The United States could not have realistically expected to find all, or perhaps even most, of the WMD during the chaos of war or in it's uncertain aftermath. Clearly the U.S. did not have solid intelligence regarding the location of any WMD in Iraq , as evidenced by the UN weapons inspectors returning from their quest empty handed. High level Iraqi officials entrusted with WMD secrets would be targets of the U.S. invasion and their privileged lives would be destroyed by the attack, however the US could not have reasonably expected to kill or catch them all . It was obvious that those Iraqi officials would be highly motivated to transfer money, WMD technology and any WMD that had existed to anyone who would help them take revenge on the United States .

{3} The Bush administration forced the war upon the world supposedly to eliminate the danger to the U.S. from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, however, on the contrary, invading Iraq was probably the most certain path to distribute the alleged Iraqi WMD, and WMD technology and a portion of Saddam's huge fortune to anti-American terrorists.

{4} President Bush's original WMD justification for invading Iraq was profoundly flawed. The national security of the United States has been seriously damaged by the war on Iraq , whether WMD existed or not, and this result was predictable before the war.

{5} These are results of President Bush's Iraq war that will haunt us for many years into the future.

{6} Even now, a terrorist group may be using a part of Saddam Hussein's huge liberated fortune to entice a military official to provide nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. Or perhaps somewhere, a guard is being bribed with Saddam's millions to give radioactive material to terrorists for use in a dirty bomb or a real nuclear weapon. The massive treasure and hate unleashed by the Iraq war may be bankrolling and motivating a WMD scientist to assist terrorists. Consider that it does not require a training camp, a state sponsor or a large group to plan and execute a devastating terrorist attack. All it takes to spread terror is a few smart motivated people with cash, meeting occasionally. The Bush Administration's Iraq war increased the number of smart motivated people with cash, motivated that is, to bring terror to Americans.

{7} There was little love for the U.S. in the Saddam regime prior to the war. The US had been involved in supporting war with Iran and instigating coups and civil war among the Sunni, Kurds and Shia; events which claimed over a million lives. In addition the U.S. was the driving force behind ten years of economic sanctions that resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths. Further aggravating the relationship was the generally acknowledged U.S. bias in the Palestinian – Israeli issue. So understandably there was hostility to the U.S in Iraq , however the WMD, if they had existed, were securely hidden and were unlikely to find their way to the U.S. without a crisis. It was more likely that vigorous UN inspections, controls and monitoring coupled with a well funded anonymous reward program would unearth any WMD in Iraq and restrict future development.

{8} Prior to the war there was no significant evidence of an operational relationship between the essentially secular Saddam regime and fundamentalist Al Qaeda, and in fact they could reasonably have been regarded as enemies. It was unlikely that the Iraqi elite would risk their lives and status to funnel money or WMD technology to Al Qaeda; the Iraqis would sensibly fear that the weapons or other resources might be used against themselves and / or that the US would retaliate explosively. These constraints on Iraqi behavior were destroyed by the U.S. invasion of Iraq .

{9} The Bush Administration and others have suggested that the WMD may have been moved out of Iraq or that these materials may still be found. At his April 14, 2004 press conference, President Bush claimed again that WMD may still be hidden in Iraq . This speculation is supporting evidence for the case that: if the Bush Administration truly believed there were WMD in Iraq then they knowingly increased the risk to the U.S. by invading Iraq . Where did the WMD go? Who might find the WMD before we do? Even if we did, or do, find a WMD stash, what happened to the rest?

{10} The post-invasion scenario of increased danger to the United States was predictable; it did not require the insight of secret intelligence in order to foresee. But what would analysts determine, with access to intelligence and time to consider the issue?

{11} For an alternate assessment consider a key judgment of the CIA's October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), presented by the CIA as an analysis of the Iraq situation, quote:

{12} “ Saddam, if sufficiently desperate, might decide that only an organization such as al-Qa'ida--with worldwide reach and extensive terrorist infrastructure, and already engaged in a life-or-death struggle against the United States--could perpetrate the type of terrorist attack that he would hope to conduct. In such circumstances, he might decide that the extreme step of assisting the Islamist terrorists in conducting a CBW attack against the United States would be his last chance to exact vengeance by taking a large number of victims with him .”

{13} Note that the CIA used “CBW” as an acronym for “Chemical Biological Weapons”.

{14} Prior to the war on Iraq in the spring of 2003, the U.N. inspectors were steadily re-tightening their grip on the country, and the U.S. national security position was improving as more sites were inspected, personnel interviewed and technology and weapons programs further understood and controlled. There were also reports that just before the attack even more dramatic concessions were offered to the U.S. by the Saddam Administration through back channels.

{15} The U.S. invasion of Iraq destroyed the opportunity to couple human rights issues and further containment of Saddam's military and WMD aspirations with revision of the U.S. sponsored sanctions program so as to allow the peaceful rebuilding of Iraqi civil society. A narrowly targeted materials embargo could have restricted only true WMD components, long range delivery systems and other items of major concern. Control of the oil could have been returned to Iraq , perhaps with financial transparency rules. A small fraction of the money spent on the war could have been instead used to implement long term weapons monitoring programs in Iraq . A small part of the cost of military occupation could have alternatively been used for development aid for Iraqis, or debt relief or even direct payments to bribe Saddam, all provided in exchange for human rights guarantees or other improvements in the lives of Iraqis. Iraq 's previous levels of high performance in secular education and health care could have been re-established. A healthy Iraqi economy and stronger civil institutions would have weakened Saddam's political grip on the people and paved the way for a future more peaceful transition to a more democratic post-Saddam Iraq .

{16} There was a viable and logical alternative to war on Iraq that would have improved the security of the US and the world, saved tens of thousands of lives, improved conditions for the Iraqis, saved US taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars and help build rather than degrade the US reputation and working relationship with the world. This logical alternative to an invasion of Iraq would have presented an example to the world of non-violent conflict resolution, something desperately needed for the future success of civilization.

{17} How might the Bush administration be excused from the charge of knowingly taking actions that could unleash WMDs upon the U.S. and the world? A defense could be based on the concept that the Administration knew there was no solid evidence of WMDs in Iraq and chose to deceive the American people, the Congress and the world in order to prosecute the war. That is a reasonable analysis based on what is now known and leads to the following conclusions:

---{17-1} One. President Bush should be immediately impeached, and along with all others involved in the deception, removed from office and prosecuted.

---{17-2) Two. The attack on Iraq can't be considered a response to imminent danger facing the U.S. or as a case of self-defense; therefore the Bush Administration violated the UN Charter and International law. The slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis, civilians and soldiers alike, was essentially mass murder. The leaders of the Bush administration should be investigated for war crimes prosecution by the appropriate international body with full cooperation from the United States .

---{17-3) Three. A thorough analysis would have recognized that an attack on Iraq would potentially release Saddam's fortune, WMD technology and WMD trained personnel to terrorists, regardless of whether the weapons actually existed. An increase in the potential for terrorism could have been predicted as the result of an unprovoked attack on Iraq . The Bush Administration should be held responsible for the damage inflicted upon the national security of the U.S. and the world.

{18} The Bush Administration has deceived the world, seriously damaged the national security of the United States, degraded world security, and directed actions that killed tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis and maimed many tens of thousands more. Thousands of American military personnel have been killed or maimed. The American people have been defrauded of hundreds of billions of dollars. These actions have corrupted the very essence of America .

{19} You can help the cause of truth and justice prevail. E-mail, write or call your elected representatives, contact local media, talk to other people; demand that a truly independent commission be established to investigate all aspects of the Iraq issue. Features of this investigation must include:

---{19-1} One. The scope of the Commission and the selection of members must be determined by an independent process not controlled by the Bush Administration or the political parties. International participation should be considered.

---{19-2} Two. Sworn testimony must be obtained from all persons involved including President Bush, without conditions or time limits.

---{19-3} Three. The Commission must have access to all information, of all security classifications. The information must be in original unedited form except for exceptional, independently reviewed cases. Access to information held by other countries must be provided to the fullest extent possible.

---{19-4} Four. Scope of the investigation must include a determination of how intelligence was gathered, analyzed and manipulated; and who knew what, when they knew it and what they told the world.

---{19-5} Five. Results must be issued prior to the November 2004 elections, at least in a substantial preliminary form.

{20} The world deserves to know the whole truth regarding this critically important issue.

{21} President Bush's deception of both Congress and the American people in addition to the damage inflicted upon U.S. national security provide an adequate basis for impeachment. You can make a positive contribution by informing your elected representatives that you favor the immediate start of the impeachment process, and that you expect this process to culminate in President Bush's removal from office.

{22} A question and a challenge:

Question: In March 2003, before the Iraq war, what course of events would have been predicted to most effectively result in Iraq 's alleged WMD, WMD technology and a portion of Saddam's fortune falling into the hands of Al Qaeda?

The WMD Challenge:

Provide an answer to that question more accurate than:

An invasion of Iraq by the United States .

{23} Another question:

What word best describes the situation in which an American knowingly takes an action that will likely result in Weapons of Mass Destruction or WMD technology or large amounts of money being provided to terrorists who wish to harm America?

To: Iraq War Audio Sampler Home Page