Broadcast: 11/08/2002
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
INSIDERS
BARRIE CASSIDY: Do you think he's wrong on the Iraq issue?
PETER COSTELLO: What happened over the weekend, Alexander Downer said the Iraqi envoy in Australia criticised the Australian Government and Mr Crean sided with the Iraqi envoy.
BARRIE CASSIDY: But that's not what he said. What the Labor Party has put together is a couple of demands that on the face seems very reasonable. Do you not agree with that, before Australia commits, there ought to be some established link between Al-Qa'ida and Iraq?
PETER COSTELLO: What the Australian Government has said is if there is an engagement in relation to Iraq, and if Australia is asked for a contribution and if it is in our national interest including ending weapons of mass destruction, the Government will consider it very carefully.
(emphasis added)
TV PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT
Hmmmm? Australia, one of the most Willing Ally in terms of Troops for the Iraq War -- seems they wanted more proof of "some established link between Al-Qa'ida and Iraq" ...
30 countries stepping up to "Defeat the Evil-Doers" -- sounds impressive -- but it was more a show of appeasement, than a show of force. Especially when you drill into the numbers ...
US names 'coalition of the willing'
By Steve Schifferes - BBC News Online in Washington -
18 March, 2003
We now have a coalition of the willing that includes some 30 nations
-- US Secretary of State Colin Powell
"I hope that they will all be able to do everything that is possible within their means to support the coalition militarily, diplomatically, politically and economically," US Secretary of State Colin Powell said.
[...]
But the state department admits that only a few of these countries are providing any major military presence in the Gulf, notably Britain and Australia.
Arab absence
And the list is most extraordinary for the countries that are left off - which include all of the Arab states, including those countries where US troops are massing for an invasion, like Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain.
[...]
No-show neighbours
Notable for their absence from the state department list were a number of members of the Nato alliance, including Canada, Belgium, and Norway, as well as France and Germany.
And the US was surprisingly unsuccessful in gaining any allies in its traditional backyard of Latin America.
[...]
Full list of coalition countries:
Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and Uzbekistan.
Source: US State Department
(emphasis added)
Funny how that clarion call for Justice in Iraq, after 9/11, went Unanswered (or weakly answered by so many of America's friends)?
Perhaps the evidence of the "Al-Qa'ida Iraq Link" was just not strong enough? Or so, our once Ally -- the country of "French Fry Lovers" -- tried to explain their Country's hesitancy, through their Ambassador:
An Interview with French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte
The Americans were now at war against terrorism, proclaiming a link between al-Qa’ida and Iraq. The next step was a pre-emptive strike on Iraq. "For Americans to find the French were not on their side—for the first time in history--came as a shock." This shock was further compounded once the war started, with Americans firmly behind the commander-in-chief and "the boys," while France was still asking, "Is this necessary?"
[...]
The third reason was a "campaign of disinformation." The Ambassador said that anonymous sources in the Bush administration time and again leaked statements that were "just disinformation." The situation became so outrageous that on May 17, 2003, the Ambassador sent a letter to the Administration, the Congress and the media enumerating seven examples of "disinformation to destroy the impression of the French." The last example was that after the fall of Baghdad, the French gave passports to Saddam Hussein and his family.
(emphasis added)
Doesn't the Good Ambassador know, that the CIA never "misleads", nor "mis-informs"? That is until some other Branch of Govt -- calls them on it. Then all the back-tracking, finger-pointing, ass-covering, begins in earnest. Funny how they're SO competent at CYA -- and not so hot at counting WMD!
Even when America's own Weapons Inspectors could find NO hard evidence of an active WMD program in Iraq -- that DID NOT slow the the foregone Conclusion that the road to National Security - went straight through Baghdad! Damn the Torpedoes! (and those calls for real Evidence, of "a clear and present danger".)
THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ: WEAPONS INSPECTORS;
The Nuclear Market: An Array of Vendors
By DAVID E. SANGER - NYTimes - Jan 25, 2004
The bluntly worded conclusion by the chief American arms inspector in Iraq, David Kay, that Saddam Hussein "got rid" of his unconventional weapons long before the Iraq invasion last year underscores a point that has become clear to intelligence experts in the past few months: President Bush moved first, and most decisively, against a country that posed a smaller proliferation risk than North Korea, Libya and Iran or even one of America's allies, Pakistan.
[...]
But the information also shows that the National Intelligence Estimate, produced in 2002 by the Central Intelligence Agency and other agencies, significantly overestimated Iraq's current abilities. The document provided the rationale for going to war quickly, without waiting for the United Nations Security Council to become convinced of the threat.
[...]
Dr. Kay concluded, for example, that Mr. Hussein once had a very active nuclear program -- before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. But along with the chemical and biological programs, it was virtually halted, it now appears, by the combination of intrusive inspections by the United Nations, sanctions that made imports of new technology extremely difficult, and Iraq's own decisions to get rid of some of its stockpiles.
(emphasis added)
The Iraq War proceeded on little more than "a wing and a prayer" -- of one day finding a valid justification, for it. Yet the "Coalition of the Coerced Willing" went along with it anyways -- at least for a while, and however half-heatedly -- as the sparse numbers show on the next link. (that Count of 30 Countries back then sure lent the invasion effort some much needed Credibility, though!)
That 'Coalition of the Willing'
That Multinational force in Iraq
has slowly retreated, back to their comfort zones of "NOT so Willing"!
Yet the fight goes on ...
cuz that Enemy never sleeps...
and those Objectives are never quite reached ...
and rational people will continue to ask:
"How do we Win a global War against an Idea?"