Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ididnotvote4him
I saw that too. right on george!
|
Yep, I saw it too, but bloviating Bill was quoting the New York Times article. You left that out. So it was the NY Times that said his Generals didn't know. Now I personally don't know if it is true or false but I Know enough about about how Saddem operated to believe it might be true.
The only question is if it is true what does it mean politically? If SH generals really did believe he had WMDs and he didn't would that change the political dynamic?
Actually, I believe it is probably false, but hey, it was published by the Al-jazeera of the west. Now if Saddem had sent the weapons into Syria he might have told the generals he didn't have any because they were in Syria. Maybe he just didn't explain it to them--a common trait. Of course we do know he had sarin gas artillery shells because one actually exploded in an IED a few months ago. So we know at least one existed. Now by simple logic, that rules out "NO WMDs" as false. But don't expect an apology from the left ever. These people are irredeemable idealogues.