"The Great Terror"

"This is truly the Groundhog Day war. Everything that happened before and during Desert Storm, we now have to live through again. The same people who lost Desert Storm for us (Scowcroft, Eagleburger, Powell) now make the same arguments against deposing Saddam. And we all have to pay respectful attention." (David Brooks)

News and commentary on Saddam Hussein and Iraq.

Part 1: 2001/06/18 - 2002/06/27
Part 2: 2001/07/05 - 2002/08/30
Part 3: 2002/09/02 - 2002/09/30
Part 4: 2002/10/01 - 2002/10/30
Part 5: 2002/11/01 - 2002/11/30
Part 6: 2002/12/01 - 2002/12/31
Part 7: 2003/01/01 - 2003/01/31

September 2002

Monday, September 23, 2002 - Monday, September 30, 2002
"Democratic Congressman Asserts Bush Would Mislead U.S. on Iraq" (John H. Cushman Jr., The New York Times, 2002/09/30)
"Congress Sharply Divided on Iraq" (Laura Meckler, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/29)
"More than 150,000 march through London against Iraq invasion" (Audrey Woods, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/28)
"U.S Plan Requires Inspection Access to All Sites" (Michael R. Gordon, The New York Times, 2002/09/28)
"Hussein 'uses doubles for public appearances'" (Hugh Williamson, Financial Times, 2002/09/27)
"Iraq: The Snare of Inspections" (Gary Milhollin and Kelly Motz, Commentary/Iraq Watch Bulletin, from the October 2002 issue)
"Al Qaeda linked to Saddam" (Rowan Scarborough, The Washington Times, 2002/09/27)
"Nothing to lose but their chains" (David Pryce-Jones, The Spectator, from the 2002/09/28 issue)
"Consider This" (Stanley Kurtz, National Review, 2002/09/26)
"Rice Links al-Qaida With Iraq" (John J. Lumpkin, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/26)
"Why Iraq Can't Be Deterred" (Kenneth M. Pollack, The New York Times, 2002/09/26)
"Moral case against war is at best naive, at worst idiotic" (Janet Daley, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/25)
"Shock Therapy" (Mohammed Al-Jassem, Newsweek, from the 2002/09/30 issue)
"Prime Minister's Iraq statement to Parliament" (Tony Blair, 10 Downing Street, 2002/09/24)
"Saddam 'has plans to use chemical weapons'" (The Guardian, 2002/09/24)
"Iraq's Faux Capitulation" (Richard O. Spertzel, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/24)

Monday, September 16, 2002 - Sunday, September 22, 2002
"A Post-Saddam Scenario" (Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic, from the November 2002 issue)
"The Lonesome Doves of Europe" (Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek, from the 2002/09/30 issue)
"Baghdad Battle May Topple Saddam" (John J. Lumpkin, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/22)
"War Plans Target Hussein Power Base" (Thomas E. Ricks, The Washington Post, 2002/09/22)
"Marching off to peace" (Ken Loach, The Observer, 2002/09/22)
"Revealed: Iraq's quest to build nuclear bomb" (Peter Beaumont and Nick Paton Walsh, The Observer, 2002/09/22)
"Iraq Says Won't Accept New U.N. Resolution" (Reuters, 2002/09/21)
"Bush Has Received Pentagon Options on Attacking Iraq" (Eric Schmitt and David E. Sanger, The New York Times, 2002/09/21)
"Ritter of Arabia" (Stephen F. Hayes, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/21)
"US studies 'Iraqi chemical war plan'" (Shyam Bhatia, The Times, 2002/09/21)
"Russia opposes new resolution" (Joseph Curl, The Washington Times, 2002/09/21)
"Saddam and the Jews" (Andrew Sullivan, andrewsullivan.com, 2002/09/20)
"The Case for Toppling Saddam" (Benjamin Netanyahu, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/20)
"Is This the Way To Decide on Iraq?" (Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, 2002/09/20)
"US threat to stop Iraq inspections" (BBC News, 2002/09/20)
"Bush Seeks OK on Iraq From Congress" (Matt Kelley, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/19)
"Iraq Tells U.N. It Is Weapons-Free" (Dafna Lifner, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/19)
"Where Have All the Iraq Experts Gone? Long Time Passing" (Martin Kramer, Sandstorm, 2002/09/17)
"'O God, deal with the Americans, the English, and the Jews' Iraqi sermon 13 September 2002" (IMRA, 2002/09/17)
"Iraq agrees to weapons inspections" (CNN.com, 2002/09/16)
"Iraq 'will have nuclear bomb in months'" (Katty Kay et al., The Times, 2002/09/16)

Monday, September 9, 2002 - Sunday, September 15, 2002
"How Saddam Happened" (Christopher Dickey and Evan Thomas, Newsweek, from the 2002/09/23 issue)
"The doves are the cynics" (The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/15)
"Saddam Hussein Trained Al Qaeda Fighters - Report" (Reuters, 2002/09/14)
"Exclusive: Scott Ritter in His Own Words" (Massimo Calabresi, TIME, 2002/09/14)
"Iraq Opposes Return of Inspectors" (Sameer N. Yacoub, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/13)
"Fictional Rift" (Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, 2002/09/13)
"At last, a strategy on Iraq" (Financial Times, 2002/09/13)
"Iraq faces weapons deadline" (BBC News, 2002/09/13)
"Bush issues ultimatum to Iraq" (BBC News, 2002/09/12)
"Divvying Up the Spoils of Iraq - The Pentagon's Vision" (Martin Sieff, The Globalist, 2002/09/12)
"In Iraqi Kurdistan" (Tim Judah, The New York Review of Books, from the 2002/09/26 issue)
"Schröder's anti-war stance puts him ahead of the pack" (Roger Boyes, The Times, 2002/09/12)
"Stupidity Watch" (James Taranto, The Wall Street Journal/Best of the Web Today, 2002/09/11)
"The War Ahead" (John Keegan, New York Post, 2002/09/11)
"Full text of Tony Blair's TUC address" (The Guardian, 2002/09/10)
"Iraq urges revenge attacks on Americans" (BBC News, 2002/09/10)
"In Zhirinovsky, Hussein Finds a Russian Partner" (Susan B. Glasser, The Washington Post, 2002/09/10)
"Iraq Calls for the Formation of Suicide Squads to Strike American Targets and Interests" (MEMRI, Special Alert - No. 3, 2002/09/09)
"Iraq nuclear dilemma exposed" (Steve Goldberg, CNN.com, 2002/09/09)
"Never mind the dossier, just leaf through 'Iraq for Dummies'" (Barbara Amiel, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/09)

Sunday, September 1, 2002 - Sunday, September 8, 2002
"Ex-Inspector Warns Against Iraq War" (Sameer N. Yacoub, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/08)
"U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts" (Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller, The New York Times, 2002/09/08)
"N-bomb for Saddam in three years" (Fraser Nelson and Alison Hardie, The Scotsman, 2002/09/07)
"Disarm Iraq Quickly, Bush to Urge U.N." (Karen DeYoung and Mike Allen, The Washington Post, 2002/09/07)
"The "Groundhog Day" War" (David Brooks, The Weekly Standard, 2002/09/06)
"U.N. Spy Photos Show New Building at Iraqi Nuclear Sites" (Julia Preston, The New York Times, 2002/09/06)
"Scowcroft Award Nominee" (Andrew Sullivan, andrewsullivan.com, 2002/09/06)
"Arab League: Iraq Strike Would 'Open Gates of Hell'" (Andrew Hammond, Reuters/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/05)
"Church leaders speak against 'wicked' war" (Ruth Gledhill and Phillip Webster, The Times, 2002/09/05)
"Bush Pledges to Seek Congressional Approval on Iraq" (Mike Allen, The Washington Post, 2002/09/04)
"Taking Apart Iraq's Nuclear Threat" (Ehud Barak, The New York Times, 2002/09/04)
"Kurd on the Street" (Claudia Rosett, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/04)
"Saddam poses 'real threat' - Blair" (The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/03)
"A Remedy in Iraq: Kurdish Autonomy" (David D. Perlmutter, Los Angeles Times, 2002/09/03)
"Europe's childish opposition" (The Jerusalem Post, 2002/09/03)
"Experts: Iraq has tons of chemical weapons" (CNN.com, 2002/09/02)
"Appeasement won't stop Saddam, any more than Hitler" (Alan Judd, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/02)

"Democratic Congressman Asserts Bush Would Mislead U.S. on Iraq" (John H. Cushman Jr., The New York Times, 2002/09/30)
"Democratic congressmen who are visiting Iraq this week stirred up anger among some Republicans when they questioned the reasons President Bush has used to justify possible military action against Iraq. ... Speaking of the administration, Mr. McDermott said, "I believe that sometimes they give out misinformation." ... When pressed for evidence about whether President Bush had lied, Mr. McDermott said, "I think the president would mislead the American people." But he said he believed that inspections of Iraq's weapons programs could be worked out. ... Mr. Bonior, the second-ranking Democrat in the House, said: 'We've got to move forward in a way that's fair and impartial. That means not having the United States or the Iraqis dictate the rules to these inspections.'" (See also: "Congress Sharply Divided on Iraq" (Laura Meckler, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/29) and "Whose side are they one?" (Andrew Sullivan, andrewsullivan.com, 2002/09/30): "So at a crucial juncture in American diplomacy, this Democrat is saying that Bush is a liar and a cheat - and in Baghdad! The only word for this is vile. ... This guy is saying that we should be neutral between the demands of the United States and Iraq over weapons inspections. Neutral. Between his own country and a vicious military despot with weapons of mass destruction, Bonior cautions neutrality." UPDATE: shilobucher.com has a transcript of the interview: "Live from Iraq" (shilobucher.com, 2002/09/30))

"Congress Sharply Divided on Iraq" (Laura Meckler, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/29)
"Despite President Bush's predictions of unity on Iraq, members of Congress voiced sharply divergent views Sunday on military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Two Democratic congressmen, speaking from Baghdad, said Iraqi officials have assured them that they will allow weapons inspectors unfettered access. The lawmakers accused Bush of wrongly pushing the United States toward war. "They said they would allow us to go look anywhere we wanted," said Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., on ABC's "This Week." "Let the U.N. inspectors do their job," added Rep. David Bonior, D-Mich. ... "You don't start out by putting the gun to their head and saying we're going to shoot you if you blink," McDermott said. Asked about Iraq's history of denying access to inspectors, Bonior said the United States should not 'play the blame game.'"

"More than 150,000 march through London against Iraq invasion" (Audrey Woods, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/28)
More than 150,000 sleepwalking to disaster: "'We believe it would be wholly immoral and wrong and criminal for the United States and Britain to attack Iraq and inflict casualties upon innocent people,' Tony Benn, a former Labor Party legislator and veteran left-winger, told a huge crowd seated in Hyde Park. ... Tam Dalyell, a senior Labor Party legislator, said the confrontation with Iraq was the most dangerous standoff since the Cuban missile crisis. "We are sleepwalking to disaster," he said, to thunderous applause from the crowd. ... Scotland Yard said more than 150,000 demonstrators took part in the march. The Stop the War Coalition, which helped organize the march, estimated that 400,000 people took part. ... The march was also meant as a protest against Israel's policies in the West Bank and Gaza, and many protesters expressed sympathy for the Palestinian cause. "Stop Israeli war crimes," said one sign."

"U.S Plan Requires Inspection Access to All Sites" (Michael R. Gordon, The New York Times, 2002/09/28)
"The Bush administration has drafted a stringent plan for arms inspections that provides for unrestricted access to all sites in Iraq, including Saddam Hussein's presidential compounds and palaces, and authorizes the use of military force if Baghdad interferes, according to European and American officials. ... Mr. Hussein has a seven-day deadline to accept the resolution and declare all of his programs of weapons of mass destruction, and a further 23 days to open up the sites concerned and provide all documents to support the declaration, an American official said. Inspections would be intrusive, possibly with military guards, and could occur at any site in Iraq. ... If Baghdad failed to comply with the inspection demands - by failing to provide a full or accurate list, for example - the draft resolution calls for "all necessary means to restore international peace and security," a diplomatic euphemism for American and British military action to remove Mr. Hussein from power." (See also: "Iraq Rejects UN Draft; U.S., British Seek Backing" (Hassan Hafidh, Reuters, 2002/09/28): "Iraq, threatening a "fierce war" if attacked, rejected on Saturday a draft U.S.-proposed Security Council resolution requiring Baghdad to comply with new arms inspection rules within 30 days or face military action.")

"Hussein 'uses doubles for public appearances'" (Hugh Williamson, Financial Times, 2002/09/27)
"Saddam Hussein uses at least three doubles to pose as him during public appearances, according to German forensic scientists. The doubles, used for security reasons, appear almost identical to the 65-year-old Iraqi leader, with only tiny differences in facial features. Plastic surgery might have been used to improve the features of doubles, claimed researchers at Homburg university in Saarland, south-western Germany. In a paper to be presented on Saturday at a German medical conference, the researchers drew on new technology to discern minor differences between images of Mr Hussein on recent photos and in video clips. Dieter Buhmann, a forensic pathologist, said he was sure at least three doubles existed, based on examining 450 images of the Iraqi leader. ... He said that in film clips taken since 1998 only the doubles, and not the leader himself, appeared. The ZDF public television network, which reported on Mr Buhmann's research this week, said the Iraqi leader also sent doubles to attend high-level internal government meetings."

"Iraq: The Snare of Inspections" (Gary Milhollin and Kelly Motz, Commentary/Iraq Watch Bulletin, from the October 2002 issue)
"Whatever one's stance on the question of how best to handle Saddam Hussein, it is vital to understand one thing. Unless the Iraqi dictator should suddenly and totally reverse course on arms inspection and everything that goes with it, or be forced into early retirement - in other words, unless Saddam Hussein's Iraq ceases to be Saddam Hussein’s Iraq inspections will never work."

"Al Qaeda linked to Saddam" (Rowan Scarborough, The Washington Times, 2002/09/27)
"Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld yesterday accused Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein of harboring al Qaeda terrorists and aiding their quest for weapons of mass destruction. ... The thrust of the administration's case during the past two days is based on:
- "Very reliable reporting" of senior-level contacts between al Qaeda and Baghdad going back a decade and occurring recently.
- Unidentified al Qaeda detainees and other sources, who say Iraq helped al Qaeda in its quest to acquire weapons of mass destruction and aided training in those weapons.
- Discussions by Iraq to provide a haven to al Qaeda members on the run, some of whom already have "found refuge" there."

"Nothing to lose but their chains" (David Pryce-Jones, The Spectator, from the 2002/09/28 issue)
"Iraq may soon be liberated. ... From the reaction all over Europe, you might think that Washington was insisting on the sacrifice of the first-born. ... The expedients to which free people are reduced in order to avoid facing up to totalitarian tyranny are always a wonder. Any Iraqi in a position to utter his opinion without being tortured and killed has no doubt at all. Kanan Makiya, Iraq's leading equivalent of the Soviet dissidents of old, asks America to 'think big'. Iraq, he writes, is the best example of why the United States 'should carefully excise the cancerous growth of extremism from the region'. ... There are tens of thousands of such people, but the Alice Mahons, George Galloways, Harold Pinters and other bishops of our cosy little world are not equipped morally or intellectually to hear them."

"Consider This" (Stanley Kurtz, National Review, 2002/09/26)
Kurtz on Kenneth Pollack's "The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq". Pollack was "the principal working-level official responsible for implementing U.S. policy on Iraq" in the Clinton administration: "But what Pollack stresses is the terrible danger that, once in possession of nuclear weapons, Saddam will take this as a license to invade Kuwait, and otherwise terrorize the Middle East. The real danger from Saddam's possession of nuclear weapons is the conviction they will create in Saddam that he can act with impunity in the region, safe in the knowledge that the U.S. or Israel will not dare attack him (for fear of risking nuclear annihilation of their troops). . ... A nuclear-armed Saddam taking over Kuwait and threatening Saudi Arabia leaves us with a choice between ceding him control of the world's oil supply, or of seeing that supply destroyed and contaminated for decades by a nuclear strike, sending the world's economy into radical shock, perhaps for years."

"Rice Links al-Qaida With Iraq" (John J. Lumpkin, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/26)
"President Bush's national security adviser said al-Qaida operatives have found refuge in Baghdad, and accused Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's regime of helping Osama bin Laden's followers develop chemical weapons. Condoleezza Rice's statements, aired Wednesday on PBS' "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" program, are the strongest yet alleging contacts between al-Qaida and the Iraqi government. Previously, evidence of the two working together was tenuous, or came from unreliable sources. ... "We clearly know that there were in the past and have been contacts between senior Iraqi officials and members of al-Qaida going back for actually quite a long time," Rice said. 'We know too that several of the (al-Qaida) detainees, in particular some high-ranking detainees, have said that Iraq provided some training to al-Qaida in chemical weapons development.'"

"Why Iraq Can't Be Deterred" (Kenneth M. Pollack, The New York Times, 2002/09/26)
"What all this suggests is that if Saddam Hussein is able to acquire nuclear weapons, he will see them as tools to achieve his goals - to dominate the Arab world, destroy Israel and punish America. He might not launch such weapons immediately in pursuit of these aims, but that is cold comfort. There is every reason to believe that he would brandish them to deter the United States from interfering in his efforts to conquer or blackmail neighboring countries. ... On the other hand, staking our hopes on a policy of deterrence would cost little now (except a loss of face), but it would run the much greater risk of postponing the day of reckoning to a time of Iraq's choosing. Given Mr. Hussein's history of catastrophic miscalculations and his faith that nuclear weapons can deter not him but us, there is every reason to believe that the question is not one of war or no war, but rather war now or war later - a war without nuclear weapons or a war with them."

"Moral case against war is at best naive, at worst idiotic" (Janet Daley, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/25)
"When the obtuse camp pleads for concern about the innocent Iraqis who may suffer in an American attack, I wonder about the innocent Kurds who have suffered under Saddam's homicidal persecution. When the obtuse-niks plead for more time for hapless United Nations weapons inspectors to be fobbed off and obstructed, I wonder if they would be so blithely passive about racist mass murder in other countries? Would George Galloway have spoken so assiduously against military intervention if the old white regime in South Africa had gassed Soweto?"

"Shock Therapy" (Mohammed Al-Jassem, Newsweek, from the 2002/09/30 issue)
"Some Arabs are proud of Saddam's development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. The more the Bush administration tries to prove that Saddam possesses those weapons, the further it gets from achieving its goal of winning converts to its cause. But the irony is that only an actual invasion of Iraq and the overthrowing of Saddam would produce a radical shift in public opinion, changing the terms of the reference of the public debate. For now, the rhetoric used to convince American public opinion does not work at all to convince Arab public opinion. In fact, this rhetoric has become a source of inspiration for Arab sloganeering. This is in part the result of widespread anti-Americanism. But, more importantly, it's a result of the fact that the Arabs are living part of their daily lives in a dream world. They sink into a political dream world, fed by the backlash to American rhetoric that is eagerly seized upon and spiced up by Arab intellectuals. ... The Arabs need shock therapy, some kind of tremor that would bring them back to reality and away from their political dreamscape. Egypt's loss in the 1967 war against Israel was the sort of shock that did away with the nationalist slogans prevalent since the July 1952 revolution carried out by Gen. Gamal Abdul Nasser. If the 1967 shock laid the ground for the spread of Islamism as an alternative to the nationalism, the "Saddam Shock" might be what is needed to launch the era of pragmatism."

"Prime Minister's Iraq statement to Parliament" (Tony Blair, 10 Downing Street, 2002/09/24)
"But two things about Saddam stand out. He has used these weapons, thousands dying in chemical weapons attacks in Iraq itself. He used them in the Iran-Iraq war, started by him, in which one million people died. And his is a regime with no moderate elements to appeal to. Read the chapter on Saddam and human rights. Read not just about the one million dead in the war with Iran, not just about the 100,000 Kurds brutally murdered in northern Iraq; not just the 200,000 Shia Muslims driven from the marshlands in southern Iraq; not just the attempt to subjugate and brutalise the Kuwaitis in 1990 which led to the Gulf War. Read about the routine butchering of political opponents; the prison "cleansing" regimes in which thousands die; the torture chambers and hideous penalties supervised by him and his family and detailed by Amnesty International. Read it all and again I defy anyone to say that this cruel and sadistic dictator should be allowed any possibility of getting his hands on more chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons."

"Saddam 'has plans to use chemical weapons'" (The Guardian, 2002/09/24)
"Iraq has "military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons", according to the government's long-awaited 50-page dossier on Saddam Hussein's regime, which was published today.
The document says Saddam has plans to use the weapons even against his own population and some are deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them. The dossier, distributed hours before the House of Commons begins an emergency debate on Iraq, also says Saddam has retained command and control authority over the weapons and has sought to acquire "significant quantities" of uranium from Africa, despite having no civil nuclear programme that could require it." (See also the dossier: "Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction - The Assessment of the British Government" (10 Downing Street, 2002/09/24) and "Iraq condemns Blair dossier" (BBC News, 2002/09/24): "The Iraqi Culture Minister, Hamid Hammadi, said Mr Blair was "acting as part of the Zionist campaign against Iraq and all his claims are baseless". In Cairo, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Naji Sabri, said the dossier "aims to justify the unjustifiable... aggressive intentions against Iraq". "This is just scaremongering, exaggeration and lies," he said.")

"Iraq's Faux Capitulation" (Richard O. Spertzel, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/24)
"When Iraq announced last week that it would allow inspectors to return without conditions, many diplomats and the press jumped with glee. At last, Iraq, responding to pressure, had a miraculous change of heart. China, Russia, France and many Arab nations quickly asserted that no new Security Council resolution would be necessary. All studiously ignored the statement's fine print, which was reinforced in the lengthy, more formal notification to the United Nations later in the week. Iraq stipulated that inspectors had to respect the country's dignity, sovereignty and territorial integrity. It also stipulated that the U.N. had to apply the rules governing elimination of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to Israel as well. If that wasn't enough condition-setting, Saddam Hussein then came back to add that all conditions previously negotiated with the U.N. had to apply, notably the hamstringing agreement by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan that called for prior notification and accompaniment of inspectors by diplomats to "sensitive" sites. This is progress? Given 24 hours notification, any country could hide even "smoking gun" evidence of a biological weapons program. Such inspections are designed for failure."

"A Post-Saddam Scenario" (Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic, from the November 2002 issue)
"Iraq has a one-man thugocracy, so the removal of Saddam would threaten to disintegrate the entire ethnically riven country if we weren't to act fast and pragmatically install people who could actually govern. Therefore we should forswear any evangelical lust to implement democracy overnight in a country with no tradition of it. Our goal in Iraq should be a transitional secular dictatorship that unites the merchant classes across sectarian lines and may in time, after the rebuilding of institutions and the economy, lead to a democratic alternative. ... In regards to Jordan and our other allies, U.S. administrations, whether Republican or Democratic, are simply going to have to adapt to sustained turbulence in the years to come. They will get no sympathy from the media, or from an academic community that subscribes to the fallacy of good outcomes, according to which there should always be a better alternative to dictators such as Hosni Mubarak, in Egypt; the Saudi royal family; and Pervez Musharraf, in Pakistan. Often there isn't. ... Our success in the war on terrorism will be defined by our ability to keep Afghanistan and other places free of anti-American terrorists. And in many parts of the world that task will be carried out more efficiently by warlords of long standing, who have made their bones in previous conflicts, than by feeble central governments aping Western models. ... The real question is not whether the American military can topple Saddam's regime but whether the American public has the stomach for imperial involvement of a kind we have not known since the United States occupied Germany and Japan."

"The Lonesome Doves of Europe" (Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek, from the 2002/09/30 issue)
"For many months now Europe has been asking whether the United States would handle Iraq unilaterally or through the United Nations. The ball is now in Europe’s court. How will it handle Iraq? The record is not encouraging. For the past 10 years France and Russia have turned the United Nations into a stage from which to pursue naked self-interest. They have used multilateralism as a way to further unilateral policies. The dust from the gulf war had not settled when the French government began a quiet but persistent campaign to gut the sanctions against Iraq, turn inspections into a charade and send signals to Saddam Hussein that Paris was ready to do business with him again. "Decades from now, when all the documents are available, someone is going to write an eye-opening book about France's collusion with Saddam Hussein in the 1990s," says Kenneth Pollack, who worked at the CIA and the NSC during those years. ... If France and Russia seek a world in which nations act purely on the basis of interest and power, they will get it. In it, America will do just fine."

"Baghdad Battle May Topple Saddam" (John J. Lumpkin, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/22)
An interesting article about the prospect of urban combat in Baghdad: "Retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, who headed the Air Force during the 1991 Gulf War, likens urban battles in Baghdad to "knife fights in a phone booth." "It would be a tremendous public affairs catastrophe if we start fighting door to door in downtown Baghdad and kill women and children trying to get Saddam," McPeak said. "The frontal assault on the urban environment is doable, but we'd lose a lot of people." ... U.S. military experts say occupying Baghdad while minimizing deaths of U.S. troops or civilians will require some unconventional thinking for ground forces wedded the to the idea of combat in the open field. ... Many of their ideas involve new tactics, rather than technology. Instead of using tanks or infantry alone, Maj. Dan Sullivan, the unit's commander, proposes having them work together in teams as small as a single tank surrounded by a squad of infantry. The infantry provides the eyes; the tank, the muscle. ... Planners also are working on a small unmanned reconnaissance plane and a wheeled robot that can investigate dangerous areas without risk to the troops." (See also: "Iraqi Strategy Centers on Cities" (Greg Miller and John Hendren, Los Angeles Times, 2002/08/08): "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has told regional government officials that he aims to thwart any U.S. invasion by avoiding open desert fighting and massing his military in major cities where civilian and American casualties would be highest, current and former U.S. intelligence officials say.")

"War Plans Target Hussein Power Base" (Thomas E. Ricks, The Washington Post, 2002/09/22)
"The war being designed now is an attack on a government, not a country. "Our interest is to get there very quickly, decapitate the regime, and open the place up, demonstrating that we're there to liberate, not to occupy," one military planner said. The bull's-eye is Hussein's hometown of Tikrit, where about 50,000 people live on the Tigris River about 100 miles north of Baghdad. "Tikrit is the political center of gravity," said Rick Raftery, a retired Marine intelligence officer who served in northern Iraq in 1991. "It must be immediately eliminated." Experts on Iraq say that Tikrit is the nexus between Hussein, the security police and his weapons of mass destruction, or WMD. "Iraq's WMD are under the control of the special security organization," Khidir Hamza, a former Iraqi nuclear engineer, recently testified on Capitol Hill."

"Marching off to peace" (Ken Loach, The Observer, 2002/09/22)
Ken Loach is "ahead of this week's anti-war demonstration". He seems to be unable to draw a distinction between dictatorships and democracies: "An authoritative witness, Scott Ritter, the man who spent seven years as a UN arms inspector in Iraq, says: 'Since 1998, Iraq has been fundamentally disarmed.' Where is the substantial evidence to counter that? If such weapons are the issue, then Israel should be first in the dock, since it possesses far more than any regime in the area. Indeed, if all are equal before the law, should not the UN send inspectors to all countries with these weapons? ... Respect for international law and UN resolutions cannot be the issue either. Israel defies the UN without suffering any sanctions. In 1986, the US was found guilty by the International Court of Justice of illegally mining Nicaragua's harbours and fined $370 million. The US ignored the court and its decision. ... The US forfeited any claim to moral leadership long ago. It has a history of undermining international law, contempt for the human rights of others and promoting its own brand of international terrorism."

"Revealed: Iraq's quest to build nuclear bomb" (Peter Beaumont and Nick Paton Walsh, The Observer, 2002/09/22)
"But the scientists and managers from Badr had different orders from Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. What they have been up to goes to the heart of US and UK concern that Saddam has been trying to assemble the expertise and materials to build weapons of mass destruction, for the men from Badr turned up at a factory in Minsk in the former Soviet republic of Belarus. ... The delegation was careful to cover its tracks, keeping the visit and the deals signed secret from the UN. Iraq went to greater lengths still to hide these purchases from the UN sanctions regime, smuggling them into Iraq via the Jordanian free port of Aqaba, and trying to hide the equipment once it reached Iraq. The Iraqi deal with Belstroyimpex was not unique. As arms inspectors and independent researchers have established in the past two years, the deal was only a small part of an intensive effort by companies and organisations linked to the Iraq's Ministry of Military Industrialisation to acquire forbidden technologies and materials from Belarus and over a dozen other countries. ... The Iraqi activity in Belarus is the most worrying evidence that Iraq is still pursuing a covert procurement programme . It may not be the 'smoking gun' that proves that Saddam has acquired the fissile material to build his bomb, but it is evidence that he is trying hard."

"Iraq Says Won't Accept New U.N. Resolution" (Reuters, 2002/09/21)
"Iraq said on Saturday it would not accept any new U.N. Security Council resolution that runs contrary to an agreement reached with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. "Iraq announces that it will not cooperate with a new resolution which is different from what has been agreed upon with the (U.N.) Secretary-General," said a statement issued following a meeting of top Iraqi leaders chaired by President Saddam Hussein. The statement carried by state-run Baghdad radio gave no details of the agreement Iraq had reached with Annan."

"Bush Has Received Pentagon Options on Attacking Iraq" (Eric Schmitt and David E. Sanger, The New York Times, 2002/09/21)
"The Pentagon has completed and delivered to President Bush a highly detailed set of military options for attacking Iraq, Pentagon and White House officials said today. ... Officials said, however, that any attack would begin with a lengthy air campaign led by B-2 bombers armed with 2,000-pound satellite-guided bombs to knock out Iraqi command and control headquarters and air defenses. They said a principal goal of the aerial bombardment would be to sever most communications from Baghdad and isolate Saddam Hussein from his commanders in the rest of the country. At the same time, according to officials knowledgeable about the planning, tens of thousands of marines and soldiers would stage out of Kuwait and possibly other countries in the region, officials said." (See also: "Iraq warns against fresh UN resolution" (BBC News, 2002/09/21): "The Iraqi declaration comes as US forces commander Tommy Franks said his forces were ready for war. "We are prepared to do whatever we are asked to do", General Franks told a news conference in Kuwait, but insisted Mr Bush had not taken a final decision.")

"Ritter of Arabia" (Stephen F. Hayes, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/21)
Hayes on Scott Ritters turnabout regarding Iraq: "Mr. Ritter's arguments lately have deteriorated, from discrepant to disturbing. On Dec. 7, in a speech delivered at the Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine in Washington, Mr. Ritter suggested that Saddam would be justified in working with al Qaeda to blow up a U.S. government building. Here is Mr. Ritter's take on the Prague meetings between an Iraqi spy and Mohamed Atta, as transcribed by the Center: 'What it appears transpired was that the Iraqi intelligence officer spoke with Mohamed Atta at length about an attack, but it was an attack on a radio transmission tower of Radio Free Europe in Prague, Czechoslovakia. If you're the Iraqi government and you're looking at the Iraqi National Congress (the prominent opposition group), they are a legitimate enemy. Indeed, you could make the case that the Radio Free Europe transmission tower, under international law, is a legitimate target.'" (See also: "Joe Biden was Right" (Sam Schulman, Jewish World Review, 2002/09/19) and "Saddam Hussein's American Apologist" (Stephen F. Hayes, The Weekly Standard, from the 2001/11/19 issue))

"US studies 'Iraqi chemical war plan'" (Shyam Bhatia, The Times, 2002/09/21)
"US intelligence experts are examining a top secret document sent to Iraqi military commanders on President Saddam Hussein’s orders that appears to confirm that they have a chemical arsenal and are prepared to use it. The 23-page military order allegedly instructs local commanders that, in the event of the Iraqi regime facing defeat in a war, the officers are free to use their own initiative and unleash chemical weapons. Signed by the head of the Iraqi Navy, it talks of preparations that must be made for a "chemical battle" between Iraqi and US forces. It also allegedly includes details of the radio-coded messages for the use of chemical weapons."

"Russia opposes new resolution" (Joseph Curl, The Washington Times, 2002/09/21)
"Russia yesterday refused to agree to a White House demand for a new U.N. resolution authorizing the use of force against Saddam Hussein, setting President Bush on a course to block the reintroduction of arms inspectors into Iraq. Russian President Vladimir Putin, who spoke by telephone for half an hour yesterday with Mr. Bush, said getting a U.N. inspection team back into Iraq to look for nuclear, biological and chemical weapons remains the priority. ... The Russian stance differs from that of the Bush administration, as articulated by Secretary of State Colin L. Powell on Thursday. ... The secretary of state went so far as to say the existing inspections regime - flouted by Saddam for years before he kicked U.N. inspectors out of Iraq in 1998 - is so unacceptable that "if somebody tried to move the team in now, we would find ways to thwart that." The differing positions on inspectors has set up a collision course between the United States and Russia, which, as one of the five permanent members on the U.N. Security Council, has veto authority over any resolution."

"Saddam and the Jews" (Andrew Sullivan, andrewsullivan.com, 2002/09/20)
"I'm mystified why more hasn't been made of Saddam's assertion in his letter to the United Nations of the global threat of world Jewry. Here's the key passage: "In targeting Iraq, the United States administration is acting on behalf of Zionism, which has been killing the heroic people of Palestine, destroying their property, murdering their children and seeking to impose their domination on the whole world, not only militarily, but also economically and politically." Like the rest of the letter, this part is barely literate but its meaning is clear. Saddam is claiming that the U.S. is a tool of Zionist forces that are trying to take over the whole world! This isn't like Hitler. It is Hitler. When a figure like this simply echoes Nazi language, why isn't there universal shock and derision? Why isn't that the headline? Or have we become completely inured to the fact that the 1930s are alive and well and centered in Baghdad and the West Bank?" (See also excerpts from the letter to the United Nations General Assembly from President Saddam Hussein of Iraq: "In Saddam Hussein's Words: It's for Oil" (The New York Times, 2002/09/19))

"The Case for Toppling Saddam" (Benjamin Netanyahu, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/20)
"Though I am today a private citizen, I believe I speak for the overwhelming majority of Israelis in supporting a pre-emptive strike against Saddam's regime. We support this American action even though we stand on the front lines, while others criticize it as they sit comfortably on the sidelines. But we know that their sense of comfort is an illusion. For if action is not taken now, we will all be threatened by a much greater peril. We support this action because it is possible today to defend against chemical and biological attack. ... But no gas mask and no vaccine can protect against nuclear weapons. That is why regimes that have no compunction about using weapons of mass destruction, and that will not hesitate to give them to their terror proxies, must never be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. These regimes must be brought down before they possess the power to bring us all down."

"Is This the Way To Decide on Iraq?" (Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, 2002/09/20)
"When the case for war is made purely in terms of American national interest - in terms of the safety, security and very lives of American citizens - chins are pulled as the Democrats think it over. But when the case is the abstraction of being the good international citizen and strengthening the House of Kofi, the Democrats are ready to parachute into Baghdad. This hierarchy of values is bizarre but not new. Liberal internationalism - the foreign policy school of the modern Democratic Party (and of American liberalism more generally) - is deeply suspicious of actions taken for reasons of naked national interest. ... My point is to express wonder at Americans who find it unseemly to act in the name of their own national interests and who cannot see the logical absurdity of granting moral legitimacy to American action only if it earns the approval of the Security Council - approval granted or withheld on the most cynical grounds of self-interest."

"US threat to stop Iraq inspections" (BBC News, 2002/09/20)
"The American Secretary of State, Colin Powell, has said the United States will find ways to stop weapons inspectors going back to Iraq unless there is a new United Nations Security Council resolution on the issue. Addressing a Congressional committee, Mr Powell said the Security Council must spell out to Iraq the serious consequences if it fails to co-operate with the inspectors. The BBC State Department correspondent Jon Leyne says the US is in effect giving an ultimatum to the Security Council."

"Bush Seeks OK on Iraq From Congress" (Matt Kelley, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/19)
"President Bush asked Congress Thursday for authority to "use all means," including military force if necessary, to disarm and overthrow Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein if he does not comply quickly with United Nations demands that he abandon all weapons of mass destruction. Separately, the White House pressed reluctant allies Russia and France to support a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing force. ... The proposal Bush sent to Capitol Hill would give him broad war-making authority. "If you want to keep the peace, you've got to have the authorization to use force," he told reporters in the Oval Office." (See also the text of the resolution: "In Bush's Words: 'Use All Means' on Iraq" (AFP/The New York Times, 2002/09/19))

"Iraq Tells U.N. It Is Weapons-Free" (Dafna Lifner, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/19)
"Iraq is free of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, Saddam Hussein told the United Nations in a speech read Thursday by his foreign minister. The White House dismissed the speech as a "disappointing failure." ... "I hereby declare before you that Iraq is clear of all nuclear, chemical and biological weapons," Sabri said, further quoting Saddam. The speech to the U.N. General Assembly - one week after Bush addressed the gathering - was greeted with loud applause by diplomats from around the world. ... "The U.S. administration wants to destroy Iraq in order to control the Middle East oil and consequently control the politics as well as the oil and economic policies of the whole world," the foreign minister said." (See also excerpts from the letter to the United Nations General Assembly from President Saddam Hussein of Iraq: "In Saddam Hussein's Words: It's for Oil" (The New York Times, 2002/09/19))

"Where Have All the Iraq Experts Gone? Long Time Passing" (Martin Kramer, Sandstorm, 2002/09/17)
Kramer on two Iraq experts who have passed away - Elie Kedourie and Uriel Dann: "In 1991, as it became clear that Saddam would remain in the saddle, Dann wrote a piece for The New Republic (June 3, 1991), entitled "Getting Even." Read these words and commit them to memory: they are the considered judgment of a man who knew Iraq as well as, if not better than, any "expert" alive today: 'Saddam Hussein does not forget and forgive. His foes brought him close to perdition and then let him off. ... He will strive to exact revenge as long as there is life in his body. He will smirk and conciliate and retreat and whine and apply for fairness and generosity. He will also make sure that within his home base it remains understood that he has not changed and will never change. ... And the day will come when he will hit, we do not know with what weapons. ... And when he does...the innocent will pay by the millions. This must never be put out of mind: Saddam Hussein from now on lives for revenge.'"

"'O God, deal with the Americans, the English, and the Jews' Iraqi sermon 13 September 2002" (IMRA, 2002/09/17)
"Baghdad Republic of Iraq Television in Arabic, official television station of the Iraqi Government, carries on 13 September 2002 at 0916 GMT a live sermon from Imam Abu-Hanifah mosque in Baghdad. ... The imam calls on the faithful "everywhere in the world" to understand "the seriousness of the savage onslaught on Islam and Muslims" and unite against the US and British aggression. ... He also prays: "O God, support your mujahidin subjects everywhere, support them in Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan. O God, make them steadfast, guide their shots, and make them triumph over Your enemy and their enemy. O God, deal with the Americans, the English, and the Jews, for they are within Your power. O God, show us a black day for them. O God, shake the land under their feet, lower their flags, sink their ships, and shoot down their planes. O God, terrorize them in their homes. O God, intimidate them, as they intimidate the peaceful."

"Iraq agrees to weapons inspections" (CNN.com, 2002/09/16)
"Iraq says it will allow U.N. weapons inspectors to immediately return to the country without conditions, but a senior U.S. official discounted the announcement, saying "we do not take what Saddam says at face value." ... The timing of the Iraqi letter coincided with a major push by the Bush administration to draft tougher U.N. resolutions ordering weapons inspectors back into Iraq on a tight deadline and threatening the use of military force if Iraq does not comply." (See also: "White House Dismisses Iraqi Offer" (George Gedda, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/16): "The White House dismissed Iraq's offer Monday to let weapons inspectors return there unconditionally — a move that could be an attempt to split the Security Council and preclude stern U.S. action against Iraq. The White House released a written statement that called the offer "a tactical step by Iraq in hopes of avoiding strong U.N. Security Council action." "As such, it is a tactic that will fail," spokesman Scott McClellan said in the statement. "This is not a matter of inspections. It is about disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the Iraqi regime's compliance with all other Security Council resolutions," McClellan said in Washington.")

"Iraq 'will have nuclear bomb in months'" (Katty Kay et al., The Times, 2002/09/16)
"Iraq could produce nuclear weapons within months using pirated German equipment and uranium smuggled from Brazil, according to a dissident Iraqi nuclear scientist. ... Dr Khidir Hamza, who was science adviser to the Atomic Energy Establishment and later helped to start and direct Iraq’s nuclear bomb programme before he defected in 1994, claims in an interview with The Times today that Saddam could be in a position to make three nuclear weapons within the next few months, if he has not already done so. ... According to Dr Hamza, that material is already inside Iraq and is currently being processed to weapons grade. He said that Iraq was using a centrifuge method to get a bomb which is easier and quicker than other methods. "Unless he's stopped soon, Saddam will have set up a whole nuclear bomb industry, not just have made a couple of bombs," Dr Hamza said." (See also: "Iraq operates nuclear weapons assembly line, defector claims" (Paul Martin, The Times, 2002/09/16): "'The amount of uranium it already has - conservatively estimated in a German intelligence report at ten tonnes of natural uranium and 1.3 tonnes of low-enriched uranium - is enough for three nuclear weapons,' Dr Hamza said.")

"How Saddam Happened" (Christopher Dickey and Evan Thomas, Newsweek, from the 2002/09/23 issue)
"The history of America's relations with Saddam is one of the sorrier tales in American foreign policy. Time and again, America turned a blind eye to Saddam's predations, saw him as the lesser evil or flinched at the chance to unseat him. No single policymaker or administration deserves blame for creating, or at least tolerating, a monster; many of their decisions seemed reasonable at the time. Even so, there are moments in this clumsy dance with the Devil that make one cringe. It is hard to believe that, during most of the 1980s, America knowingly permitted the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission to import bacterial cultures that might be used to build biological weapons. But it happened. ... The Bush administration played down Saddam's darkness after the gulf war. Pentagon bureaucrats compiled dossiers to support a war-crimes prosecution of Saddam, especially for his sordid treatment of POWs. They documented police stations and "sports facilities" where Saddam's henchmen used acid baths and electric drills on their victims. One document suggested that torture should be "artistic." But top Defense Department officials stamped the report secret. One Bush administration official subsequently told The Washington Post, "Some people were concerned that if we released it during the [1992 presidential] campaign, people would say, 'Why don't you bring this guy to justice?'" (Defense Department aides say politics played no part in the report.)"

"The doves are the cynics" (The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/15)
"Many fallacies have proliferated about the prospective conflict with Iraq, but the most objectionable is the claim that the nations that propose military action against Saddam are acting cynically, for reasons of realpolitik, while those countries opposed to war are driven only by moral reservations. According to this analysis, President Bush and the Prime Minister have sacrificed ethics to aggressive national self-interest, in contrast to the high-minded leaders of continental Europe, who are nobly trying to do the right thing. In fact, the opposite is the case. ... On the one side, there are the nations exacting a price for support, or waiting to see what happens, or putting party political considerations ahead of strategic thinking. On the other, are the countries - only two, so far - striving to rid the world of a maniac who brandishes the most terrifying weapons, who was behind the 1993 attempt to destroy the World Trade Center, and who holds his own people in miserable captivity. In this perilous but necessary endeavour, it is Mr Bush and Mr Blair who are the true idealists."

"Saddam Hussein Trained Al Qaeda Fighters - Report" (Reuters, 2002/09/14)
"British Prime Minister Tony Blair's promised dossier on Iraq is to reveal that Saddam Hussein trained some of Osama bin Laden's key lieutenants, The Sunday Telegraph reported. The dossier is also expected to disclose that the Iraqi leader has reconstructed three plants to manufacture biological and chemical weapons, it said. ... The Sunday Telegraph said a draft version of the dossier contains detailed information on how two alleged leading al Qaeda members, Abu Zubair and Rafid Fatah, underwent training in Iraq and are still linked to the Baghdad government."

"Exclusive: Scott Ritter in His Own Words" (Massimo Calabresi, TIME, 2002/09/14)
An interview with the former UN inspector Scott Ritter: "You've spoke about having seen the children's prisons in Iraq. Can you describe what you saw there?
The prison in question is at the General Security Services headquarters, which was inspected by my team in Jan. 1998. It appeared to be a prison for children - toddlers up to pre-adolescents - whose only crime was to be the offspring of those who have spoken out politically against the regime of Saddam Hussein. It was a horrific scene. Actually I'm not going to describe what I saw there because what I saw was so horrible that it can be used by those who would want to promote war with Iraq, and right now I'm waging peace." (See also: "Ex-Inspector Warns Against Iraq War" (Sameer N. Yacoub, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/08))

"Iraq Opposes Return of Inspectors" (Sameer N. Yacoub, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/13)
"A top Iraqi official said Baghdad opposes the return of U.N. weapons inspectors and President Bush's speech to the United Nations was "full of lies." "We do not accept Bush's conditions," Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz said in an interview in Baghdad that was broadcast Friday." (See also: "Bush Doubts Iraq Will Meet Deadline" (Barry Schweid, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/13): "In a meeting with African leaders, Bush reiterated his request for a U.N. resolution - "as soon as possible" - demanding that Saddam disarm his weapons programs. "We're talking days and weeks, not months and years," the president said in outlining his request for a U.N.-imposed deadline on Saddam. ... "I am highly doubtful that he will meet our demands. I hope he does, but I'm highly doubtful," Bush told reporters. "The reason I'm doubtful is he's had 11 years to meet the demands. For 11 long years, he has basically told the United Nations and the world he doesn't care.")

"Fictional Rift" (Charles Krauthammer, The Washington Post, 2002/09/13)
"It turns out that the disagreement among Republicans was less about going to Iraq than about going to the United Nations. It was a vastly overblown disagreement, because even the most committed unilateralist would rather not go it alone if possible. Of course you want allies. You just don't want to be held hostage to their veto. ... So what's left of the Republican revolt? Dick Armey, the sage of Lewisville, Tex., has been telling people that, sure, Iraq may have nuclear weapons, but so does France, and if you ask him, he's got more of a problem with France than with Iraq. The world now waits to see whether the Democrats will join Armey at the barricades."

"At last, a strategy on Iraq" (Financial Times, 2002/09/13)
"President George W. Bush yesterday proved himself a master of the art of turning the tables on his critics, by choosing to make his case for an urgent showdown with Iraq in terms of the very diplomatic multilateralism they hold so dear. In doing so, he delivered a speech to the United Nations General Assembly that was, by some way, the most powerful indictment of Saddam Hussein that has been heard from the administration since the drumbeat towards war began six months ago. ... Above all, the speech cleverly emphasised that what is at stake is the post-1945 international system itself. ... As Mr Bush said, it is the authority of the UN itself that is challenged. The onus is on the rest of the Security Council - especially the other permanent members with a veto - to demonstrate their commitment to helping the UN and the international system it represents to face down the challenge to its authority."

"Iraq faces weapons deadline" (BBC News, 2002/09/13)
"America is pressing the UN to issue Iraq with a deadline for the return of weapons inspectors within weeks. US Secretary of State Colin Powell is starting an urgent round of talks with key UN members after President George Bush, in a speech to the UN, warned of military action. ... Mr Powell is to meet other permanent members of the UN Security Council - Britain, France, Russia and China - with the possibility of Britain being asked to draw up the resolution before the end of next week, correspondents say. The resolution the US is seeking would demand the return of weapons inspectors to Iraq within weeks, with one US official telling Reuters news agency that compliance would be required on a range of other issues. "There are not going to be any negotiations with Iraq," the official said. It would also contain an implicit threat of military action either against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein or against targeted weapons sites."

"Bush issues ultimatum to Iraq" (BBC News, 2002/09/12)
"Iraq is a "grave and gathering danger", President Bush has told world leaders in a keynote speech at the United Nations. He issued one last chance to Iraq to comply with UN resolutions - or face America's military might. ... Mr Bush said Saddam Hussein had proved his contempt for the United Nations and listed all the UN resolutions he considered Iraq to have ignored or broken. "By his cruelties... Saddam Hussein has made the case against himself," he said. ... He accused Saddam Hussein of allowing members of Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda network to be based in Iraq. "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately and unconditionally forswear, disclose, and remove or destroy all weapons of mass destruction, long-range missiles and all related material," he said." (See also: "A Decade of Deception and Defiance" (The White House, 2002/09/12), a document with examples of Saddam Hussein's defiance of the United Nations, and "President's Remarks at the United Nations General Assembly" (George W. Bush, The White House, 2002/09/12): "My nation will work with the U.N. Security Council on a new resolution to meet our common challenge. If Iraq's regime defies us again, the world must move deliberately and decisively to hold Iraq to account. The purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced - the just demands of peace and security will be met - or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power.")

"Divvying Up the Spoils of Iraq - The Pentagon's Vision" (Martin Sieff, The Globalist, 2002/09/12)
An interesting article on plans discussed inside Pentagon for a post-war Iraq: "In conclusion, the changes now being seriously contemplated by the Pentagon's new grand wizard of global strategy are not only unprecedented in over 80 years for the Middle East. They also represent a degree of micromanaging and a crusading ambition undreamed of by any U.S. President for even longer. In fact, it has not happened since Woodrow Wilson. At the time, he was enthusiastically assisted by the young Walter Lippmann and a motley crew of fellow idealistic, ambitious young aides resolved to end the ancient controversies of Central Europe. ... The Versailles Conference and Peace Treaty proved to be a political and human catastrophe that spawned a second world war even more destructive than the one it ended. ... Messrs. Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and their advisors seem oblivious to the possibility that the wildly ambitious schemes they are contemplating could set off a comparable Armageddon in 20 days or 20 months, let alone 20 years."

"In Iraqi Kurdistan" (Tim Judah, The New York Review of Books, from the 2002/09/26 issue)
Brilliant reporting from Iraqi Kurdistan: "One prisoner, Muhammed Mansour Shahab Ali, said he had smuggled guns from Iraqi intelligence to Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. He also claimed that two years ago he smuggled thirty refrigerator motors, given to him and an accomplice by a relative of Saddam Hussein, from Iraq to bin Laden; they were, he believes, filled with some sort of gas or liquid, although he didn't know what it was. In view of Saddam's use of chemical weapons in Kurdistan and during the Iran–Iraq war, this, if true, raises the possibility that Iraq was supplying bin Laden with materials for just such weapons. Shahab Ali said he could not give any reason why Saddam Hussein would want to support al-Qaeda, which has publicly denounced secular Arab regimes such as Saddam's. But, Ali said, "bin Laden liked fighting. He only liked fighting," implying that if al-Qaeda forces would be helpful in fighting the Kurds and now the US, Saddam would welcome them. I asked him if he had any regrets. He thought a bit and said that his only real regret was that he had strangled his wife, the mother of his twin boys, now lost somewhere in Afghanistan."

"Schröder's anti-war stance puts him ahead of the pack" (Roger Boyes, The Times, 2002/09/12)
"For the first time since the 1980s, the Social Democrats are playing the anti-American card and, astonishingly given the outpouring of sympathy after September 11, most Germans are following the Chancellor's lead. "What kind of friendship is it that does not permit disagreement over the existential question of war and peace?" Herr Schröder asked the crowd. "It cannot be that a friend demands something and we immediately have to do as we are told: that's subordination and that's not my thing, not my thing at all." This statement earned big applause. It has been a similar story across the country: the Germans seem ready to vote for a politician who stands up to President Bush. ... He has emphasised that he is against a war with Iraq - "Never under my leadership" - even if there is a United Nations mandate. Herr Schröder also seems to rule out a financial contribution to such a campaign. Plainly, a common European line on Iraq has become impossible and if the Chancellor wins the election, US-German relations will be strained."

"Stupidity Watch" (James Taranto, The Wall Street Journal/Best of the Web Today, 2002/09/11)
"In an interview with Newsweek, former South African president Nelson Mandela defends Saddam Hussein and lashes out at Israel: "What we know is that Israel has weapons of mass destruction. Nobody talks about that. Why should there be one standard for one country, especially because it is black, and another one for another country, Israel, that is white." This is racist drivel. Iraq is Arabic, not black; and Israel, a multiracial democracy, is no more "white" than America is." (See also: "Nelson Mandela: The United States of America is a Threat to World Peace" (Newsweek, 2002/09/10) "Because what [America] is saying is that if you are afraid of a veto in the Security Council, you can go outside and take action and violate the sovereignty of other countries. That is the message they are sending to the world. That must be condemned in the strongest terms. And you will notice that France, Germany Russia, China are against this decision. It is clearly a decision that is motivated by George W. Bush's desire to please the arms and oil industries in the United States of America.")

"The War Ahead" (John Keegan, New York Post, 2002/09/11)
"In the circumstances, it seems incomprehensible that sensible Westerners can possibly doubt the need to prevent Saddam acquiring nuclear weapons. Those in the United States who oppose military action seem motivated by short-term fears, particularly that action might make things worse. Those in Europe who oppose it reveal an old-fashioned anti-Americanism. ... Words of caution may seem wise at the moment. How will they sound when Saddam has the bomb? It will be too late then for the opponents of action now to say that they meant well. Saddam does not mean well at all. Meanwhile, the hidden apparatchiks of the Terror War are laying their plans and keeping their powder dry."

"Full text of Tony Blair's TUC address" (The Guardian, 2002/09/10)
Full text of Blair's speech to the Trades Union Congress in Blackpool: "Suppose I had come last year on the same day as this year - September 10. Suppose I had said to you: there is a terrorist network called al-Qaida. It operates out of Afghanistan. It has carried out several attacks and we believe it is planning more. It has been condemned by the UN in the strongest terms. Unless it is stopped, the threat will grow. And so I want to take action to prevent that. Your response and probably that of most people would have been very similar to the response of some of you yesterday on Iraq. There would have been few takers for dealing with it and probably none for taking military action of any description." (See also: "The Real Parallell" (Andrew Sullivan, andrewsullivan.com, 2002/09/10): "The answer seems to me a pretty clear one: almost all the critics of pre-emption would have refused to go into Afghanistan to prevent 9/11. Their policy is this: we have to wait to get devastated before we act. My policy is: once is enough.")

"Iraq urges revenge attacks on Americans" (BBC News, 2002/09/10)
"Iraq has called on Arabs to strike back at American lives and property if the US launches a military attack against Baghdad. Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan - speaking after talks with King Abdullah in the Jordanian capital, Amman - called for Arabs to "confront the material and human interests of the aggressors wherever they are found". ... Mr Ramadan said Baghdad had the right to defend itself, adding that "all Arab citizens, wherever they might be, have the right to fight by all available means". ... Mr Ramadan said it was "shameful" that senior US and British officials were using "lies" to build a case against Iraq. "The West - and Britain and America in particular - are used to lying," he said."

"In Zhirinovsky, Hussein Finds a Russian Partner" (Susan B. Glasser, The Washington Post, 2002/09/10)
"Vladimir Zhirinovsky brags happily about his "good friend" Saddam Hussein. He eagerly takes credit for a planned $40 billion long-term economic cooperation agreement between Russia and Iraq, and can't wait to tell a visitor to his smoky parliamentary office just how beloved the Russians are in Baghdad these days. The deputy speaker of the Russian State Duma even compares Hussein with Stalin - and it's meant to be a compliment to both. An honored guest at Hussein's birthday party last year, Zhirinovsky once likened U.S. bombing raids against Iraq to Hitler's treatment of the Jews. ... Zhirinovsky is best known here as leader of a marginal political party with a flair for racist invective and demagoguery. ... But when it comes to Iraq, Zhirinovsky is not as isolated as his outlandish statements might make him seem. Indeed, large parts of the Russian public and the political elite in Moscow agree with Zhirinovsky on Iraq, believing the country to be key to Russia's economic future and strongly opposing any U.S. attack."

"Iraq Calls for the Formation of Suicide Squads to Strike American Targets and Interests" (MEMRI, Special Alert - No. 3, 2002/09/09)
Excerpts from an editorial in the Iraqi weekly Al-Iqtisadi [The Economist], which is owned by Saddam Hussein's eldest son Uday, calling "for the formation of suicide [fidaiyoon] squads to launch broad-based sabotage operations against the United States, its friends, and interests": "...The United States practices international terrorism against the whole world. By doing so, it turns peoples and governments into hostages, thereby causing the suspension of international activities and generating fears and instability in the international domain. This conduct has similarities with Hitler and Nazism which led the world to a world war. ... They should use all means-and they are numerous-against the aggressors ... considering everything American as a military target, including embassies, installations, and American companies, and to create suicide/martyr [fidaiyoon] squads to attack American military and naval bases inside and outside the region, and mine the waterways to prevent the movement of war ships..."

"Iraq nuclear dilemma exposed" (Steve Goldberg, CNN.com, 2002/09/09)
"Iraq could assemble a nuclear weapon in months if it had foreign help, a report into Baghdad's arms programmes has concluded. The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) also says Iraq could have been stockpiling chemical and biological weapons since 1998 when U.N. inspectors left the country and were refused permission to return. ... The IISS, an independent international research group that examines political, economic and military trends, concludes: 'War, sanctions and inspections have reversed and retarded but not eliminated Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and long-range missile capacities, nor removed Baghdad's enduring interest in developing these capabilities.'" (See also: "Iraq WMD Dossier Statement" (IISS, 2002/09/09))

"Never mind the dossier, just leaf through 'Iraq for Dummies'" (Barbara Amiel, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/09/09)
"For the past few weeks it has been impossible to escape some glum pundit demanding that the President of the United States "explain" why the United States needs to make war on Saddam Hussein. ... If this were genuine, one could make a fortune on a quick edition of Iraq for Dummies. ... But whether it is the Financial Times, Jon Snow or Radio 4 and Tam Dalyell together with all other pleading pundits, politicians and professors in search of the illuminating "dossier" of Saddam's evil-doings, this craving for knowledge fails to convince. These voices never floundered before. They have never let information alone stand in the way of telling Prime Ministers and Presidents what to do about the Cold War, the Gulf war, the Panama invasion, the Falklands, Global Warming, Poverty, Hunger and Dirt. One suspects that they really want to put their collective heads in the sand or, less generously, side with a coalition of anti-Americans, muddled Marxists and confused admirers of Islamism all intent on seeing capitalism, Israel and America crippled. But as this agenda is not quite respectable, so it must be masked by a feigned thirst for knowledge."

"Ex-Inspector Warns Against Iraq War" (Sameer N. Yacoub, AP/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/08)
"Iraq is incapable of producing weapons of mass destruction and should prove it by allowing in U.N. weapons inspectors, an American who was once on the inspections teams said Sunday. With his comments during a visit to Baghdad, Scott Ritter - who has been a sharp critic of U.S. policy on Iraq - joined a long list of officials from European and Arab nations who have urged Iraq to accept inspectors to defuse a crisis with the United States. ... "The truth is Iraq is not a threat to its neighbors and it is not acting in a manner which threatens anyone outside its borders," Ritter said. "Military action against Iraq cannot be justified." ... Ritter resigned from the U.N. inspection team in August 1998 after several years as a member. He left denouncing the Clinton administration for having withdrawn support for the U.N. agency and undermining weapons inspections. He has since said Washington used the inspectors to spy on Iraq - a longtime charge by Baghdad - and manipulated the United Nations to provoke a confrontation with Saddam as a pretext for U.S. airstrikes on Iraq." (See also: "Saddam Hussein's American Apologist" (Stephen F. Hayes, The Weekly Standard, from the 2001/11/19 issue): "Obviously, Ritter's views on Iraq have changed over the past three years. Indeed, they've basically flipped. Then, Iraqi leaders were inveterate liars; today, they are victims of American "propaganda mills." Then, Saddam Hussein was hell-bent on building his deadly arsenal; today, he wants to feed Iraqi children. Then, the key to Iraq's future was overthrowing Saddam Hussein; today, Hussein is a 'viable dictator.'")

"U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts" (Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller, The New York Times, 2002/09/08)
"More than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today. In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes, which American officials believe were intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium. American officials said several efforts to arrange the shipment of the aluminum tubes were blocked or intercepted but declined to say, citing the sensitivity of the intelligence, where they came from or how they were stopped."

"N-bomb for Saddam in three years" (Fraser Nelson and Alison Hardie, The Scotsman, 2002/09/07)
"Saddam Hussein has the capability to make an atomic bomb within three years, and has stockpiled enough chemical and biological weapons to wipe out the world’s population, according to the file on Iraq due to be released by Downing Street. The dictator is understood to control enough chemicals to make more than 200 tonnes of VX, a powerful nerve agent. This is understood to be the most potent element in a full complement of weapons, which is missing only the enriched uranium needed to complete a nuclear bomb. Intelligence sources say the final piece in the jigsaw could be available by 2005."

"Disarm Iraq Quickly, Bush to Urge U.N." (Karen DeYoung and Mike Allen, The Washington Post, 2002/09/07)
"President Bush plans to tell world leaders at the United Nations next week that unless they take quick, unequivocally strong action to disarm Iraq, the United States will be forced to act on its own, senior administration officials said yesterday. The president's Thursday speech will open the door to a possible new round of U.N. inspections of Iraq's biological, chemical and other forms of weapons. ... The official said Bush will remind the Security Council that its enforcement track record in Iraq is abysmal, with Hussein having flouted 16 resolutions since 1990. Hussein regularly impeded the U.N. inspections required as part of the 1991 Persian Gulf War ceasefire agreement. It is widely agreed that, over the past four years, he has reconstituted and expanded Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs. And according to some U.S. officials, he has made progress toward nuclear weapons. Bush, one senior official said, will make it clear that it is U.N., not U.S., credibility that's at stake."

"The "Groundhog Day" War" (David Brooks, The Weekly Standard, 2002/09/06)
"This is truly the Groundhog Day war. Everything that happened before and during Desert Storm, we now have to live through again. The same people who lost Desert Storm for us (Scowcroft, Eagleburger, Powell) now make the same arguments against deposing Saddam. And we all have to pay respectful attention. The same prognosticators of doom get to repeat their false predictions, and the bright and the beautiful nod at their sage counsel. If we don't learn from history, we are condemned to repeat it. If we do learn from history, we are condemned to repeat it. We all are condemned to repetition. Yesterday, I was listening to "The World" which is a left-wing foreign affairs program produced by Public Radio International and which appears on many NPR stations. There was a fawning interview with an American woman living in Pakistan who argued that if the United States goes into Iraq, (A) the Arab Street would explode, (B) the Middle East peace process would be destroyed, (C) a thousand terrorists would arise to replace the ones we topple or kill. They could have taped that interview 11 years ago. They could have taped it before the war in Afghanistan. They could have taped it before Reagan bombed Libya. And yet there was no hint in the voice of the woman making the remarks or in the voice of the starry-eyed interviewer, that this was anything but the freshest and sagest counsel. This is the real Nile Virus - people developing amnesia about their past false predictions about the Middle East."

"U.N. Spy Photos Show New Building at Iraqi Nuclear Sites" (Julia Preston, The New York Times, 2002/09/06)
"A team of weapons inspectors, studying satellite photography, have identified several nuclear-related sites in Iraq where new construction or other unexplained changes have occurred since the last international inspections nearly four years ago, a United Nations official said today. ... "We are very curious to see what is under the roof," Mr. Baute said, referring to the new buildings. "There are some activities that could be part of prohibited activities, but we have nothing now that allows us to draw a conclusion."

"Scowcroft Award Nominee" (Andrew Sullivan, andrewsullivan.com, 2002/09/06)
"Jimmy Carter, a president whose foreign policy brought the United States to its weakest international position in the second half of the twentieth century, is - surprise! - against doing anything militarily against Saddam. A few days after September 11, he wasn't quite so dovish. Even Carter could see the evil when it flew into this country. But even then - even then - he preferred some sort of collective, protracted muiltilateral solution that would not involve "bombing or missile attacks against, for instance, the people of Afghanistan." ... The great thing about Carter is his consistency. He may well be an admirable man, but he's also been consistently wrong about everything since the day he took office." (See also: "President Jimmy Carter's Speech at Habitat's 25th Anniversary Celebration Indianapolis, Indiana September 15, 2001" (habitat.org, 2001/09/15) and "The Troubling New Face of America" (Jimmy Carter, The Washington Post, 2002/09/05): "Formerly admired almost universally as the preeminent champion of human rights, our country has become the foremost target of respected international organizations concerned about these basic principles of democratic life.")

"Arab League: Iraq Strike Would 'Open Gates of Hell'" (Andrew Hammond, Reuters/Yahoo! News, 2002/09/05)
"Arab League chief Amr Moussa said Thursday a strike against Iraq would "open the gates of hell" in the Middle East, and urged Baghdad to readmit weapons inspectors in coordination with the United Nations. ... Resolutions issued by the foreign ministers from 20 Arab states called for a "complete rejection of threats of aggression against some Arab countries, in particular Iraq." ... "We will continue to work to avoid a military confrontation or a military action because we believe that it will open the gates of hell in the Middle East," Moussa told reporters at the end of the two-day meeting."

"Church leaders speak against 'wicked' war" (Ruth Gledhill and Phillip Webster, The Times, 2002/09/05)
The Archbishop of Westminster urges "generous self-sacrifice" as an alternative to an attack on Iraq: "In an article in The Times today the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, writes that a war would have grave consequences, possibly setting the Arab world against the West. ... Dr Eamon Duffy, Fellow and President of Magdalen College, Oxford, and president of the Catholic Theological Association, urged Mr Blair and President Bush to take heed of the Cardinal’s comments, which he described as a shrewd counsel of prudence and an urgent call to moraliy. 'If the democratic West is to retain moral credibility and if we are to avoid a murderous confrontation with an Islamic world radicalised by poverty and resentment of Western imperialism, then we have to move beyond defending our interests and punishing our enemies. We need to demonstrate our desire to share the freedoms and prosperities we enjoy with the world's poor.'" (See also: "The standards by which war with Iraq must be judged" (Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, The Times, 2002/09/05): "By pouring almost inconceivably massive resources into preparing for, and then prosecuting, military conflict, we inevitably divert funds from the war on world poverty. By so doing, we further endanger the fragile lives of millions of people, over and above those who become victims of conflict itself. ... I am convinced that the might of generous self-sacrifice, rather than the might of arms, is the only way to construct a more just and more peaceful world.")

"Bush Pledges to Seek Congressional Approval on Iraq" (Mike Allen, The Washington Post, 2002/09/04)
"President Bush told congressional leaders today that he wants to build an international coalition to depose Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, promising to seek their authorization before an invasion and outlining a brisk schedule for consulting skeptical world leaders. ... "One of the things I made very clear to the members here is that doing nothing about that serious threat is not an option for the United States," Bush said as he met reporters at the end of the private, hour-long meeting. "At the appropriate time, this administration will go to the Congress to seek approval necessary to deal with the threat. At the same time, I will work with our friends in the world." ... But Bush said he will use an address to the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Sept. 12 to outline the dangers Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction pose to the civilized world." (See also: "Text: Bush Delivers Remarks on Iraq" (The Washington Post, 2002/09/04))

"Taking Apart Iraq's Nuclear Threat" (Ehud Barak, The New York Times, 2002/09/04)
"Those who prefer to wait and hope for the best should contemplate the following: no one really knows how close Saddam Hussein is to building a crude nuclear device — and it was a crude device that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Few will doubt Mr. Hussein's readiness to use a nuclear weapon against American assets or against Israel, if only under extreme circumstances. ... Nothing can be assured in advance. But the opportunities far exceed the dangers. The greatest risk now lies in inaction. The history of the last century showed us clearly what the price of paralysis can be. The public debate over Iraq policy must continue. But the readiness to act, once the time is ripe, should not fade away."

"Kurd on the Street" (Claudia Rosett, The Wall Street Journal, 2002/09/04)
"Meet Barham Salih, prime minister of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan,