Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld labeled as "false and ... inaccurate" the notion that the United States is acting unilaterally in its effort to achieve Iraqi disarmament.

In a March 6 interview on CNBC television, Rumsfeld said "We have a 90-nation coalition in the global war on terrorism. It's the biggest coalition in the history of mankind. We will have a large number of countries if force [in Iraq] has to be used. The U.N. resolution [1441] passed unanimously. There are countries lining up to be helpful with military assistance in the event force has to be used, with respect to basing and over-rights, with respect to intelligence cooperation and with respect to assistance in a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq."

Rumsfeld said the "one or two or three or four countries" that are opposing military intervention in Iraq "are not the world." He said "Those are important countries, many of them are good friends of ours, and they have a different opinion, and that's fair enough, and God bless them; they ought to say what they think and they ought to do what they think, but they are not the world. There are lots of countries in the world, and a lot of countries have been enormously supportive and helpful."

[Note to reader: Although the interviewer was referring to a coalition of countries that would support use of force in Iraq, and specifically the lack of support from Russia, France and Germany, Rumsfeld misled the interviewer/audience by answering "In the global war on terror, President Bush has put together a coalition of 90 nations."

Please see entry dated 2003-03-18 "Coalition of the Willing" for actual list of countries with current updates of coalition involvement.]
State Dept Press Release - US Embassy Rome, published 03-08-2003

Iraq's dictator has made a public show of producing and destroying a few missiles, missiles that violate the restrictions set out more than 10 years ago. Yet our intelligence shows that even as he is destroying these few missiles, he has ordered the continued production of the very same type of missiles.

Iraqi operatives continue to hide biological and chemical agents to avoid detection by inspectors. In some cases these materials have been moved to different locations every 12 to 24 hours, or placed in vehicles that are in residential neighborhoods. We know from multiple intelligence sources that Iraqi weapons scientists continue to be threatened with harm should they cooperate with U. N. inspectors.

Scientists are required by Iraqi intelligence to wear concealed recording devices during interviews, and hotels where interviews take place are bugged by the regime.
President George Bush Discusses Iraq in National Press Conference, published 03-06-2003

Our common objective remains the full and effective disarmament of Iraq, in compliance with resolution 1441. We consider that this objective can be achieved by the peaceful means of the inspections.

We moreover observe that these inspections are producing increasingly encouraging results:

· The destruction of the Samoud missiles has started and is making progress

· Iraqis are providing biological and chemical information

· The interviews with Iraqi scientists are continuing. ...

In these circumstances, we will not let a proposed resolution pass that would authorise the use of force. Russia and France, as permanent members of the security council, will assume all their responsibilities on this point.

[Note to reader: A follow-up article is available at CBS News]
The Guardian, published 03-06-2003

With an American-led war on Iraq appearing ever more likely, the United States and Britain said today that they would urge the Security Council to vote next week on a new resolution that would give Iraq until March 17 to disarm. But France, Russia and China, which hold veto power, swiftly dismissed the new proposal.

The new move to unite the world's deeply divided powers came after the chief United Nations weapons inspectors bluntly if quietly contradicted some American and British assertions about Iraqi violations and drew sharp rebuttals from Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and the British foreign minister, Jack Straw.

Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said that a report — which had earlier been identified as coming from British intelligence — that Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from Niger was based on fake documents.

Both Dr. ElBaradei and Hans Blix said that under the threat of force, Iraqi cooperation was increasing, though belatedly. Mr. Blix noted, "One can hardly avoid the impression that after a period of somewhat reluctant cooperation, there has been an acceleration of initiatives from the Iraqi side since the end of January." To complete inspections properly "even with a proactive Iraqi attitude," he said, "would not take years, nor weeks, but months."

[See also: Article regarding this issue here]
New York Times, published 03-07-2003

Secretary of State Colin Powell says the United States does not see a need for the heads of state or government of the countries that sit on the U.N. Security Council to meet in an effort to resolve the impasse over what to do about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

"I don't see a particular need for a heads of state and government meeting at the Security Council, which really isn't the place to deal with issues like this or the forum to deal with issues like that," Powell told reporters at the United Nations in New York March 7. ...

"Others believe that just continuing the inspections, but they never quite say how long. For months? How many months? For what purpose? With what additional inspectors? And can anyone commit to me and guarantee the international community that we will achieve disarmament just with more inspections without a fundamental change on the part of Iraq to come into full compliance, and therefore full cooperation, with the verification and monitoring activities of the inspectors," Powell said. ...

"I believe in the very near future, sometime next week, that resolution ought to be brought to the Council for a vote, and let's see where everyone is. And I don't think this just can continue on and on and on," Powell said.

[The link below contains the full text of Powell's comments to reporters after his Remarks to the United Nations Security Council]
State Dept Press Release - US Embassy Rome, published 03-07-2003

Before bombs even began falling on Baghdad, the Bush administration awarded a secret, no-bid contract to repair and operate Iraq’s oil infrastructure -- worth up to $7 billion -- to Kellog Brown & Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton, a Houston-based oil services and construction company. ...

The contract, issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers, was shrouded in secrecy from the beginning -- it was signed on March 8 but was not announced until March 24. Even then, the Corps released only a vague description of the work to be performed.

The Corps did not reveal the potential value of the contract until April 8, a disclosure that came only in response to questions from Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA). As interest in the contract grew, the administration continued to stonewall and in certain instances provided misleading information. This was possible because the KBR contract and the documents justifying and approving the Corps' decision to forego competive bidding are classified and unavailable for public review.

[See also: Additional Resource OpenSecrets.org "Rebuilding Iraq -- The Contractors" -4/28/03]
OMB Watch.org, published 09-10-2003

Secretary of State Colin Powell said March 9 that there is a "strong chance" that the new U.S.-British-Spanish proposal on Iraqi disarmament before the U.N. Security Council will receive the needed nine votes for passage. The measure, which would set a March 17 deadline for Iraqi compliance with Security Council disarmament demands, is to be voted on in coming days.

Powell made the comment on NBC's Meet the Press. On another program the same day, CNN's Late Edition, Powell was asked what would happen if the resolution did not pass. "The president has shown a determination to disarm Iraq and to disarm Saddam Hussein of his weapons of mass destruction," Powell said. "And if we get the vote, fine, then the international community is unified behind that effort. If we don't get the vote, the president then will have to make a judgment as to whether or not we're prepared now to lead a coalition of the willing to disarm Saddam Hussein, to change the regime, because that seems to be the only way to get him to disarm. ...

White House National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, interviewed the same day on ABC's This Week, said that if the proposed resolution did not win approval, "certainly, we will talk to members of the coalition. And let me just say, it will be a coalition. And one interesting thing about this coalition is it's made up in large part of states that have suffered under tyranny. And that should say something to people. And yes, at some point, the United States, at a time and place of its choosing, will lead a coalition to disarm Saddam Hussein and at that point, change its regime."

[See also: Complete Powell interview with Meet the Press here OR here]
State Dept - Washington File, published 03-10-2003

Secretary of State Colin Powell, interviewed March 9 on Fox News Sunday, said the March 17 deadline in a new U.N. Security Council resolution proposed by the United States, Britain and Spain would set Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's last chance to comply with U.N. disarmament demands. If he does not comply, "I think everybody knows what that means: it's time to force compliance through the use of military force," Powell said.

[Full transcript of interview at link below or here]
State Dept - Washington File, published 03-09-2003

On Sunday, March 9, 2003 -- 10 days before launching war with Iraq -- President Bush was increasingly worried about the political peril of his chief ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

"Do you think he could lose his government?" Bush asked Condoleezza Rice, his national security adviser.

"Yes," she replied.

"Would the British really do that?" ...

The president was very worried. He called Blair for one of their regular conversations. ...

If it would help, Bush said, he would let Blair drop out of the coalition and they would find some other way for Britain and its 41,000 military personnel in the region around Iraq to participate.

"I said I'm with you. I mean it," Blair replied.

Bush said they could think of another role for the British forces -- "a second wave, peacekeepers or something. I would rather go alone than have your government fall."

"I understand that," Blair responded, "and that's good of you to say. I said, I'm with you."

Bush said he really meant that it would be all right for Blair to opt out. "You can bank on that."

"I know you do," Blair said, "and I appreciate that. I absolutely believe in this, too. Thank you. I appreciate that. It's good of you to say that," the prime minister repeated in his very British way. "But I'm there to the very end."

[For the same article, plus the 4 others in this series, please visit Global Policy Forum

The exact content of the resolution on Iraq to be voted on soon at the United Nations Security Council in New York "remains a matter of consultation and discussion among various nations," White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer told reporters March 10.

"Ambassadors at the United Nations and others are in the final stages of diplomacy in New York, in anticipation of a vote that will take place this week," he said.

"Some nations have suggested such things as benchmarks. There are ideas that are being explored and looked at. And so it is too soon to say what the final document that will be voted on will include. It's too soon to say what the exact date will be," he said.

"(C)onsultation is important, listening to the ideas of various nations is important" in the current "important phase of diplomacy," Fleischer said. "That's under way," he said, but he had no indication "whether anything is final in the language that has been offered in the amended version of the resolution."

[Note to reader: Link goes to transcript of press briefing. For the summary shown above please go here]
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 03-10-2003

Since November, there have been more than 120 air strikes, compared with 110 in the previous 34 months, according to GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington nonprofit group focused on defense issues.

"While, officially, no decision has been made on a recourse to military action, the air campaign part of the war really started months ago in all but name," said Francois Boo of GlobalSecurity.org.

[Original web page no longer available]
Knight-Ridder, published 03-11-2003

President Bush March 11 continued to phone world leaders to discuss Iraq and the diplomatic discussions taking place at the United Nations Security Council on the amended U.S.-British-Spanish draft resolution, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer told reporters.

That amended resolution sets March 17 as a deadline for Iraq to fully disarm. ...

But what the president has said is that there is room for a little more diplomacy, but not a lot of time to do it."

Fleischer said the vote "will take place this week," but when asked if the United States would be able to accept a new deadline for Iraqi disarmament if the council were to set one, Fleischer said "Well, this is part of the diplomacy that's under way, and we'll see what the date is, if there is a different date. That's part of the diplomacy that's under way."

President Bush, he said, thinks "any suggestion of 30 days, 45 days is a non-starter."

[Note to reader: Link goes to transcript of press conference. For the summary shown above please go here]
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 03-11-2003

The U.S. military yesterday exploded a newly developed 21,500-pound monster weapon nicknamed the "mother of all bombs" - and let Saddam Hussein know he will face its devastation in any war on Iraq.

The terrifying bomb, officially called the Massive Ordnance Air Blast or MOAB, is the largest non-nuclear weapon in history and creates a fear-inspiring mushroom cloud after it is detonated.

[Original article on New York Post web page no longer available.]
New York Post, published 03-12-2003

The British ambassador to the UN is circulating six tests by which Iraqi compliance would be measured, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has said.

"...We have been working flat out in recent days for agreement on a second resolution. That process is now coming to a conclusion. A decision will have to be taken by the end of this week.

Four months ago, in Resolution 1441, the United Nations gave Iraq a final opportunity to disarm by co-operation, or face serious consequences.

In order to seek the widest consensus, Sir Jeremy Greenstock is now discussing further amendments to our draft with Security Council partners. And he is circulating six tests by which Iraqi compliance would be measured. Each of those tests is demanding, but deliverable. They are:

a statement by Saddam Hussein admitting that he has concealed weapons of mass destruction, but will no longer produce or retain weapons of mass destruction;

deliver at least 30 scientists for interview outside Iraq, with their families;

surrender all anthrax, or credible evidence of destruction;

complete the destruction of all Al Samoud missiles;

account for all unmanned aerial vehicles, including details of any testing of spraying devices for chemical and biological weapons;

surrender all mobile chemcial and biological production facilities.

These tests are not traps. Every one of them could be met promptly, if only Saddam Hussein were to make the strategic choice to co-operate with the UN. ..."

[Additional resource: U.K.: 6 steps to avert war ]
10 Downing Street - UK Press Release, published 03-12-2003

"...JIC [UK Joint Intelligence Committee] ...warned that "al Qaeda-associated terrorists continued to arrive in Baghdad in early March." ...

"A senior U.S. intelligence official said....that the CIA was made aware of the reporting "simultaneously." The CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency passed on warnings to Bush administration policymakers that U.S. forces would probably be attacked by "stay behind" Iraqi forces and Islamic terrorists who would be drawn to Iraq by the invasion, officials said."
Washington Post, published 07-15-2004

Q: Ari, the President was very clear last week, he wanted a vote in the Security Council: it's time for countries to show their cards. And now today, Secretary Powell says, among the options is to go for a vote, or not to go for a vote. What's going on here?

MR. FLEISCHER: Okay, let me try to share or inform you about where things stand in the fluid situation with the diplomacy.

The end is coming into sight, and there are numerous routes to reach that end through the diplomacy the President is pursuing. And the President has said that he seeks a vote, and we seek a vote. There are options, as the Secretary has said. I discussed with you this morning the possibility of the vote coming to a conclusion tomorrow, or it could continue into next week. ...

Q: My point is, why is the President going through this charade of diplomacy when he obviously plans to go to war?

MR. FLEISCHER: Helen, this is a very serious word, the diplomacy. And the President is carrying it out because he believes in the value of consultations.
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 03-13-2003

The Security Council March 13 failed to find any common ground on the United Kingdom's proposal for changes in the draft resolution on Iraq currently up for a vote.

After four hours of private talks, diplomats acknowledged that the proposal not only failed to bridge the divide in the council, but the council's so-called "undecided six" non-permanent members were beginning to work on their own proposal for a resolution. ...

The U.K. proposal was an attempt to overcome the reluctance of six undecided non-permanent members to accept the draft as it stood. The undecided members are Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Guinea, Mexico, and Pakistan.

France and Russia, which have veto power in the council, have rejected the U.K. proposal as well as the draft resolution.
State Dept - Washington File, published 03-13-2003

MR. RUSSERT: How close are we to war?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I think we are still in the final stages of diplomacy, obviously. ...

MR. RUSSERT: If your analysis is not correct, and we’re not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. ...

MR. RUSSERT: And even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said he does not have a nuclear program, we disagree?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I disagree, yes. And you’ll find the CIA, for example, and other key parts of our intelligence community disagree. ...

We know that based on intelligence that he has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He’s had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. I think Mr. ElBaradei frankly is wrong.

[Original web page no longer available]
NBC - Meet the Press, published 03-16-2003

War in Iraq "certainly could be averted" if Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, along with his sons and other top Iraqi leaders were to leave the country and were replaced by "a more responsible leadership ... determined to get rid of its weapons of mass destruction ... and start to provide a better life for the Iraqi people," Secretary of State Colin Powell said March 16.

Interviewed in Fox News Sunday, Powell also discussed the roles of France, Germany and Turkey in the Iraq crisis. Regarding a French proposal for a meeting of foreign ministers in the United Nations Security Council March 18, Powell "I don't know that there's any purpose to be served by yet another meeting when the disagreement is so fundamental: more inspections, more time for inspections, or full compliance right away, immediately, unconditionally, as called for in [Security Council Resolution] 1441 on the part of Saddam Hussein."

[Note to reader: Complete State Department transcript also available here and original Washington File story available here.]
State Dept Press Release - US Embassy Rome, published 03-16-2003

MR. RUSSERT: And even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said he does not have a nuclear program, we disagree?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I disagree, yes. And you’ll find the CIA, for example, and other key parts of our intelligence community disagree. ...

We know that based on intelligence that he has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He’s had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. I think Mr. ElBaradei frankly is wrong.

[Note to reader: Original web page no longer available.]
NBC - Meet the Press, published 03-16-2003

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. ...

The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat. But we will do everything to defeat it. Instead of drifting along toward tragedy, we will set a course toward safety. Before the day of horror can come, before it is too late to act, this danger will be removed. ...

Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. For their own safety, all foreign nationals -- including journalists and inspectors -- should leave Iraq immediately. ...

Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war, and every measure will be taken to win it."
President Bush Address to the Nation, published 03-17-2003

The Department of Homeland Security in consultation with the Homeland Security Council, has made the decision to raise the national threat level from an Elevated to High risk of terrorist attack or Level Orange. The Intelligence Community believes that terrorists will attempt multiple attacks against U.S.and Coalition targets worldwide in the event of a U.S led military campaign against Saddam Hussein. ...

While the March 1 arrest of senior Al Qaida operative, Khalid Shaykh Muhammad (KSM) has put the Al-Qaida senior leadership on the defensive and will be debilitating in the long term -- the Intelligence Community believes that KSMs capture will not necessarily affect operations that are ready or nearly ready for execution. There are many recent indications that Al-Qaidas planning includes the use of chemical, biological, and/or radiological materials. ...

In recent months, there have been reports of suspicious activity in and around military facilities, ports, waterways, general infrastructure (bridges, dams, power generating facilities), and targets that are considered symbolic to U.S.power and influence.

[This High (Orange) Threat level remains in effect until Apr. 16, 2003 when it was lowered to Elevated (Yellow)]
Statement by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, published 03-17-2003

(U.S., U.K. blame France for subverting second Security Council resolution)

U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan March 17 ordered all U.N. weapons inspectors, peacekeepers, and humanitarian aid workers to withdraw from Iraq.

After a private meeting with the U.N. Security Council, Annan said that he was withdrawing the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) weapons inspectors searching for chemical and biological weapons and long range ballistic missiles and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors examining Iraq's nuclear weapons program.

Also being withdrawn are the U.N. Iraq-Kuwait Observer Mission (UNIKOM) troops on the Iraq-Kuwait border and the humanitarian aid workers involved in the Oil-for-Food program.

As of March 17, there were more than 300 U.N. staff in Iraq, U.N. officials said. ...

Before the closed door meeting, the United States, United Kingdom, and Spain announced that they would not ask for a vote on their draft resolution on Iraq, because of a threatened veto by France.
State Dept - Washington File, published 03-17-2003

Excluding forces deployed in direct support of Operation Enduring Freedom, there are probably about 211,000 military personnel in the CENTCOM area of responsibility, including about 1,100 aircraft of all types. Based on the number of Brigade Sets that were prepositioned in the region it is believed that there are roughly 850 M1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks and 406 M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles.

The number of troops deployed in the area fluctuates on a daily basis, and has averaged between 20,000 and 25,000 in recent years, with typically about 200 aircraft in the region. Forces in the region include a mix of special operations forces deployed in support of US Central Command operations. To enhance force protection throughout the region, additional military security personnel are also deployed.

Ground forces include a variety of units that are normally deployed in the region, which total about 3,700 troops. Forces in the region include a Patriot missile task force with two batteries deployed in Saudi Arabia and two in Kuwait. Virtually all of 3rd Infantry Division has been deployed to Kuwait, though it is possible that some battalions are still in the process of deploying. It is believed that the total Army presence in the region is nearly 64,000 soldiers. Army equopment figures are based on standard Tables of Organization and Equipment for the units deployed. The number of Army mechanized equipment actually on the ground (rather than on ship) is thought to be roughly 638 M1 Abrams and 406 M2 Bradleys. This figure is based on the available prepositioned Brigade sets that were in the region including equipment at Diego Garcia. It is not clear how much additional equipment has been shipped to the region from the United States though it there is enough kit for 2 mechanized divisions minus the equipment for the 4th Infantry Division. This means that the United States could have more tanks than people to man them. There are 144 AH-64 Apache helicopters in the region.
GlobalSecurity.org, published 08-2005

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

Sincerely,

GEORGE W. BUSH
Text of Presidential Letter, published 03-18-2003

"Coalition of the willing" is a phrase which has been used since the 1980s to refer to groups of nations acting collectively and often militarily outside of the jurisdiction of the United Nations mandates and administration.

Its most prominent use was by the George W. Bush administration to refer to the multinational force in Iraq - nations whose governments supported the United States position in the Iraq disarmament crisis and later the March 2003 invasion of Iraq (see Occupation of Iraq, 2003-2004). The original list in March 2003 included 48 members - White House List.
Wikipedia.org , published 03-21-2003

"THE PRESIDENT: My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger.

On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war. These are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign...

Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly-yet, our purpose is sure...

Now that conflict has come, the only way to limit its duration is to apply decisive force. And I assure you, this will not be a campaign of half measures, and we will accept no outcome but victory."
President Bush Addresses the Nation, published 03-19-2003

The top National Security Council official in the war on terror resigned this week for what a NSC spokesman said were personal reasons, but intelligence sources say the move reflects concern that the looming war with Iraq is hurting the fight against terrorism. ...

"This is a very intriguing decision (by Beers)," said author and intelligence expert James Bamford. "There is a predominant belief in the intelligence community that an invasion of Iraq will cause more terrorism than it will prevent. There is also a tremendous amount of embarrassment by intelligence professionals that there have been so many lies out of the administration -- by the president, (Vice President Dick) Cheney and (Secretary of State Colin) Powell -- over Iraq." ...

"If it was your job to prevent terror attacks, would you be happy about an action that many see as unnecessary, that is almost guaranteed to cause more terror in the short-term?" said one official. "I know I'm not (happy)."

Beers joined the NSC in August after heading the State Department's International Narcotics and Law Enforcement branch, where he ran the Plan Colombia program to fight narco-traffickers in that country. Beers served both Bush administrations as well as serving in similar capacities with both the Clinton and Reagan administrations.
United Press International, published 03-19-2003

Months of tense negotiations between Ankara and Washington ended late on Thursday night (Ankara time) when the Turkish Parliament approved the resolution authorising overflight rights for the US.

But the vote will not allow US troops to use Turkey as a staging post for a northern front nor does it allow US fighter planes to land in Turkey or attack Iraq from the US air base in Incirlik, which is used to patrol Iraq's northern flight-exclusion zone.

Earlier this month, the Turkish Parliament rebuffed US hopes of sending 62,000 troops into northern Iraq in return for a $US6 billion ($A10 billion) in direct aid.

The US appears to have abandoned hopes of sending troops via Turkey, with White House spokesman Ari Fleischer saying on Thursday that the aid-for-access package would "not be on the table" in future talks.
The Age - Australia, published 03-22-2003

Q: And may I ask if the administration expects the allied forces to find evidence or remnants of chemical or biological weapons, or a reconstituted nuclear program?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly. This was the reason that the President felt so strongly that we needed to take military action to disarm Saddam Hussein, since he would not do it himself.

As the military effort continues, I think you will see information develop for yourself, firsthand. This is one of the reasons that there are so many reporters present with the military. In many ways, you will have these answers yourselves. You are there, you are on the ground. And you will find the answers and they will speak volumes themselves.

Q: So you expect the weapons will be found?

MR. FLEISCHER: There's no question. We have said that Saddam Hussein possesses biological and chemical weapons, and all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes. ...

Q: Ari, some former Presidents have come to the West Wing, like, in the middle of the night when they've been conducting wars. You said yesterday that President Bush does not feel like he should be micromanaging this war. Can you expand on that a little bit and tell us why he feels that way?

MR. FLEISCHER: Because the President believes that the best way to carry out a military operation is to very carefully, thoroughly review the plans in advance; to ask the hard questions of the planners as the plan is being developed; to have a team in whom he has confidence; to have a military on the ground that is superbly trained, well equipped, and well paid. The President is satisfied that those criteria have been met. He would not have authorized action had he not been satisfied that those criteria were met. And that is the President's approach to it.
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 03-21-2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And… as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.
Central Command Headquarters Press Briefing, published 03-22-2003

Q: Can you get into the weapons of mass destruction sites? They were listed the first night of the air campaign. How many were struck? What do you expect was there? Are there chem, bio or long- range missiles? And did you use any special kinds of weaponry -- incendiary devices, for example, to take them out?

Clarke: If you go back to what Secretary Rumsfeld talked about yesterday, and General Franks went through it again today, clearly one of our top priorities, one of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites. I won't go into details which ones they are, where they are, but it is a --

Q: More than 10? Less than a hundred?

Clarke: No, I will not give you a ballpark, but I will do two things. One is just underscore what a priority that is for us; and, two, try to manage expectations. We know with great certainty the Iraqi regime was extraordinarily skilled at hiding the stuff, at dispersing the stuff in very small amounts in underground bunkers. So I want to manage expectations. It could be difficult to find and exploit this stuff.
Dept of Defense - News Briefing Transcript, published 03-22-2003

Lynch and members of her unit had been captured by Iraqi forces after their vehicles got lost on 23 March 2003. A special U.S. team rescued Lynch from an Iraqi hospital on 1 April 2003, but found no other American soldiers alive.

Jessica Lynch became an icon of the war. An all-American heroine, the story of her capture by the Iraqis and her rescue by US special forces became one of the great patriotic moments of the conflict. It couldn't have happened at a more crucial moment, when the talk was of coalition forces bogged down, of a victory too slow in coming.

Her rescue will go down as one of the most stunning pieces of news management yet conceived. It provides a remarkable insight into the real influence of Hollywood producers on the Pentagon's media managers, and has produced a template from which America hopes to present its future wars.

But the American media tactics, culminating in the Lynch episode, infuriated the British, who were supposed to be working alongside them in Doha, Qatar. This Sunday, the BBC's Correspondent programme reveals the inside story of the rescue that may not have been as heroic as portrayed, and of divisions at the heart of the allies' media operation.

[Note to reader: see also Answers.com and MSNBC News]
The Guardian, published 05-15-2003

Kenneth Adelman, a former Reagan arms control official who is close to top Bush military officials and serves on a Pentagon advisory panel, said these weapons are likeliest to be found near Tikrit and Baghdad, "because they're the most protected places with the best troops."

"I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction," Adelman said, though he acknowledged some surprise that they have not been used yet. "One thing we may find is Saddam Hussein ordered them to be used and soldiers didn't follow the orders. The threat of use goes down every day because adherence to orders goes down."
Washington Post, published 03-23-2003

I have always said to people throughout that our aim has not been regime change, our aim has been the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. ... The idea that we can suddenly discover this stuff is a lot more difficult in a country the size of Iraq, but of course once the regime is out then there will be all sorts of people that will be willing to give us the information that we seek. ... We have absolutely no doubt at all that these weapons of mass destruction exist.
Prime Minister Tony Blair Press Conference, published 03-25-2003

(Funds also to be used for relief, reconstruction and for global war on terror)

President Bush, in remarks at the Pentagon March 25, announced that he was sending the U.S. Congress a wartime supplemental appropriations request of $74.7 billion, "to fund needs directly arising from the Iraqi conflict and our global war against terror."

The president said the funds would be used "to pay for the massive task of transporting a fully-equipped military force, both active duty and reserve, to a region halfway around the world," and also includes money for relief and reconstruction in a free Iraq.
Remarks by the President on the Wartime Supplemental, published 03-25-2003

We've destroyed the base of a terrorist group in Northern Iraq that sought to attack America and Europe with deadly poisons. We have moved over 200 miles to the north, toward Iraq's capital, in the last three days. (Applause.) And the dictator's major Republican Guard units are now under direct and intense attack. (Applause.) Day by day, Saddam Hussein is losing his grip on Iraq; day by day, the Iraqi people are closer to freedom. (Applause.)

We are also taking every action we can to prevent the Iraqi regime from using its hidden weapons of mass destruction. We are attacking the command structure that could order the use of those weapons. Coalition troops have taken control of hundreds of square miles of territory to prevent the launch of missiles, and chemical or biological weapons.

[Note to reader: For further information on this "Northern Iraq" terrorist group please see the article in the Christian Science Monitor titled The rise and fall of Ansar al-Islam, October 16, 2003:

"Ansar for 1 1/2 years was isolated, manipulated by both Iraq and Iran, and locked in stalemate with far superior Kurdish forces. Its "poison factory" proved primitive; nothing but substances commonly used to kill rodents were found there."]
President Rallies Troops at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, published 03-26-2003

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, weapons of mass destruction. Key goal of the military campaign is finding those weapons of mass destruction. None have been found yet. ... How big of a problem is that?

SEC. RUMSFELD: Not at all. If you think -- let me take that, both pieces -- the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.
ABC - This Week, published 03-30-2003

A special U.S. team rescued Lynch from an Iraqi hospital on 1 April 2003, but found no other American soldiers alive.

Her rescue will go down as one of the most stunning pieces of news management yet conceived. It provides a remarkable insight into the real influence of Hollywood producers on the Pentagon's media managers, and has produced a template from which America hopes to present its future wars.

[Note to reader: see also Answers.com and MSNBC News]
The Guardian, published 05-15-2003

Excluding forces deployed in direct support of Operation Enduring Freedom, there are probably about 230,000 military personnel in the CENTCOM area of responsibility, including about 1,100 aircraft of all types. Based on the number of Brigade Sets that were prepositioned in the region it is believed that there are roughly 850 M1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks and 406 M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles.

The number of troops deployed in the area fluctuates on a daily basis, and has averaged between 20,000 and 25,000 in recent years, with typically about 200 aircraft in the region. Forces in the region include a mix of special operations forces deployed in support of US Central Command operations. To enhance force protection throughout the region, additional military security personnel are also deployed.

Ground forces include a variety of units that are normally deployed in the region, which total about 3,700 troops. Forces in the region include a Patriot missile task force with two batteries deployed in Saudi Arabia and two in Kuwait. Virtually all of 3rd Infantry Division has been deployed to Kuwait, though it is possible that some battalions are still in the process of deploying. It is believed that the total Army presence in the region is nearly 71,000 soldiers. Army equipment figures are based on standard Tables of Organization and Equipment for the units deployed. The number of Army mechanized equipment actually on the ground (rather than on ship) is thought to be roughly 638 M1 Abrams and 406 M2 Bradleys. This figure is based on the available prepositioned Brigade sets that were in the region including equipment at Diego Garcia. It is not clear how much additional equipment has been shipped to the region from the United States though it there is enough kit for 2 mechanized divisions minus the equipment for the 4th Infantry Division. This means that the United States could have more tanks than people to man them. There are 144 AH-64 Apache helicopters in the region.
GlobalSecurity.org, published 08-2005

The destruction of weapons of mass destruction continues to be our priority. We are continuing to search the areas that have been freed, but our first priority must be an end—a successful end—to the military conflict. Thereafter, we will certainly pursue the location of weapons of mass destruction.
UK Parliament - House of Commons, published 04-07-2003

BLAIR: On weapons of mass destruction, we know that the regime has them. We know that as the regime collapses, we will be led to them. We pledged to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, and we will keep that commitment. ...

BUSH: We believe free nations must oppose the spread of weapons of mass destruction. And we believe that free nations must advance human rights and dignity across the world.
President Bush Meets with Prime Minister Blair in Northern Ireland, published 04-08-2003

Q: I'm not asking for specifics, but I want to know specifically if the United States knows where a cache of WMD is. Is there a location that they could send troops to if the site was clean, they could go to it and get it?

MR. FLEISCHER: What we have always said is that we know that they have it and they are expert at hiding it --

Q: Do we know where any of it is?

MR. FLEISCHER: Ron, we've always said we know they have it, they are expert at hiding it. I can't discuss all intelligence information. And this is something that Secretary Powell talked about when he went to the United Nations and talked about their abilities to hide. But make no mistake, we maintain high confidence that they have it and it will be found.

Q: Do we know where any of it is?

MR. FLEISCHER: David.

Note to reader: Fleischer moves on to another question and doesn't answer Ron as to where they might be. Briefing continues with:

Q Ari, part of the reason for the war was WMD. Now, well into the war, WMD has not been found. The American public is going to the television every morning, listening to the radio every morning, trying to find out if, indeed, WMD was found. Does the administration feel there's some awkwardness right now with these statements of they're professionals at hiding, and we know it's there? I mean, is there some sort of awkwardness about the fact that this has not been found as of yet?

MR. FLEISCHER: No. We know Saddam Hussein is there, but we haven't found him yet, either. The fact of the matter is we are still in a war, and not everything about the war is yet known. But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 04-10-2003

Administration critics should feel shock over their bellyaching about the wayward war plan. All of us feel awe over the professionalism and power of the U.S. military. Now we know.

On Feb. 13, 2002, I wrote a sleeper-cell op-ed for this page. ...

Now is not an occasion for gloating. ...

But now is an occasion for pride, and for thanks to our fighting men and women and those leading them. My confidence 14 months ago sprang from having worked for Don Rumsfeld three times -- knowing he would fashion a most creative and detailed war plan -- and from knowing Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz well for many years. ...

Admittedly, along the way came some big surprises. First, I never imagined Saddam Hussein would have another year-plus to beef up his resistance. ...

Third (sic), I should have anticipated that a terrorist leader would form terrorist units in his armed forces. That seems a stupid error now, as Saddam Hussein's Fedayeen and other hit-squad units proved a potent force for a time.

Last, and another oversight, was how a totalitarian regime could so pulverize its people and military as to intimidate them, at least for a time, out of celebrating even their own liberation.

But at least now we know.

[Note to reader: The writer was assistant to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld from 1975 to 1977 and a U.N. ambassador and arms-control director under President Ronald Reagan. He now co-hosts TechCentralStation.com.

Kenneth (Ken) Adelman biography.]
Commentary in the Washington Post, published 04-10-2003

Q: "You're fully confident we will find weapons of mass destruction?"

Rumsfeld: "...They have hid things. They have done it well. They have things underground and well dispersed and documentation dispersed. The only way we are going to find it -- the inspectors didn't find anything. We're not going to find anything until we find people who tell us where the things are." ...

Q: "How important is it for the United States to find weapons of mass destruction because with the stated cause of the war to disarm Saddam Hussein?"

Rumsfeld: "Oh, clearly it's on the priority list to be done. It's not the kind of thing you spend much time doing when you're in a war and you're trying to win the war and stop the violence and stop the killing."
NBC - Meet the Press, published 04-13-2003

Schieffer: Are you still convinced we will find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

Rumsfeld: Oh my goodness, there's been so much intelligence, CIA material about what's been going on in that country that if we can find the right people who will tell us where they've located them then that's the way we're going to find them. Inspectors didn't find them and certainly we're not going to find them. It's not like a treasure hunt when you run around and dig down and see if there's a tunnel some place. You've got to find the people who dug the tunnels, the people who've worked in those operations.

Schieffer: And you think we will?

Rumsfeld: I do.
CBS - Face the Nation, published 04-13-2003

Following a review of intelligence and an assessment of threats by the intelligence community, the Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Homeland Security Council, has made the decision to lower the threat advisory level to an elevated risk of terrorist attack, or "yellow level."

[This Elevated (Yellow) Threat level remains in effect until May 20, 2003 when it was raised to High (Orange)]
Statement by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, published 04-16-2003

"The United States is very concerned that states seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction give up that quest, and that they live within the commitments that they've made in such things as the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, the chemical weapons convention, and the biological weapons convention," said the State Department's John Bolton in an interview with Radio Sawa.

Bolton, the under secretary of state for arms control and international security affairs, said the United States intends to exert "a maximum diplomatic effort" to persuade "states like Syria, Libya and Iran among others to give up their pursuit of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and long range ballistic missile delivery systems."

The elimination of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq holds a lesson, he said: "We are hoping that the elimination of the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein and the elimination of all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction would be important lessons to other countries in the region, particularly Syria, Libya and Iran, that the cost of their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is potentially quite high."
Radio Sawa - Interview with John Bolton, published 04-16-2003

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld predicted that over the course of time Iraqis will tell coalition forces where to find concealed Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Speaking to civilian and military employees at a Pentagon "town hall" meeting April 17, Rumsfeld said it is only in recent days that specially trained teams tasked with hunting down WMD have gained sufficient access to parts of the country where such weapons are likely to be found. ...

As pressure mounts to find Iraqi WMD, Rumsfeld said the Iraqis buried some items and hid others in underground tunnels to avert detection by inspectors. "I don't think we'll discover anything (related to WMD)," the secretary said. Rather, Iraqis "will tell us where to go find it. ...

Even with photographic and other documented evidence, Rumsfeld suggested that there will still be attempts by certain countries and individuals to assert falsely that any Iraqi WMD evidence was planted in Iraq by coalition forces. There will always be people who lie and "get away with it," he lamented.
State Dept - Washington File, published 04-17-2003

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld dismissed as "inaccurate and unfortunate" any suggestion that the United States seeks a permanent military presence in Iraq, noting that there has been "zero discussion" on that among senior Bush administration officials.

"I have never heard the subject of a permanent base in Iraq discussed," the secretary said, in response to a question from a reporter at an April 21 Pentagon press briefing. The question was prompted by an April 20 New York Times article quoting unnamed senior Bush administration officials suggesting that the U.S. would like to have access to as many as four key Iraq bases throughout the country.
State Dept - Washington File, published 04-21-2003

Excluding forces deployed in direct support of Operation Enduring Freedom, there are probably about 250,000 military personnel in the CENTCOM area of responsibility, including about 1,100 aircraft of all types. Based on the number of Brigade Sets that were prepositioned in the region it is believed that there are roughly 850 M1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks and 406 M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles

The number of troops deployed in the area fluctuates on a daily basis, and has averaged between 20,000 and 25,000 in recent years, with typically about 200 aircraft in the region. Forces in the region include a mix of special operations forces deployed in support of US Central Command operations. To enhance force protection throughout the region, additional military security personnel are also deployed.

Ground forces include a variety of units that are normally deployed in the region, which total about 3,700 troops. Forces in the region include a Patriot missile task force with two batteries deployed in Saudi Arabia and two in Kuwait. Virtually all of 3rd Infantry Division has been deployed to Kuwait, though it is possible that some battalions are still in the process of deploying. It is believed that the total Army presence in the region is nearly 88,000 soldiers. Army equipment figures are based on standard Tables of Organization and Equipment for the units deployed. The number of Army mechanized equipment actually on the ground (rather than on ship) is thought to be roughly 638 M1 Abrams and 406 M2 Bradleys. This figure is based on the available prepositioned Brigade sets that were in the region including equipment at Diego Garcia. It is not clear how much additional equipment has been shipped to the region from the United States though it there is enough kit for 2 mechanized divisions minus the equipment for the 4th Infantry Division. This means that the United States could have more tanks than people to man them. There are 144 AH-64 Apache helicopters in the region.
GlobalSecurity.org, published 08-2005

"What we do know is that there are people who in large measure have information that we need, and we need that information so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country. We need that information so that we can track down the terrorist links between Saddam Hussein's regime and various terrorist networks. And we need it to track down other people. We need it to find records so that we can go through this process of "de-Ba'athification," if there's such a word, trying to eliminate the influence of the Ba'ath Party in that country. There's lots of very important projects we've got."
Dept of Defense - News Briefing, published 04-25-2003

...It is true that we are interviewing scientists and others, but our first priority has got to be to stabilise the country, the second is the humanitarian situation, and the third - and we can take our time about this and so we should - is to make sure that we investigate the weapons of mass destruction, and we will do that. And as I say every time I am asked, I remain confident that they will be found." ...

Well, on the independent verification as I have been saying recently we need to discuss this with the UN and amongst the allies, but I have got no doubt at all that we need some process of independent verification. In respect of the first point, it is very important people realise two things. The first is there isn't any doubt that Iraq has had weapons of mass destruction. That is not in dispute, not from anybody. ...

Now the second thing that is our case, the case that we have been making to people over the last few months, is that prior to the inspectors coming back in because there was a 6-month period if you like when it was clear the United States and ourselves were going to take action, and also clear that inspectors might be coming in, there was a 6-month campaign of concealment of these weapons. That is our intelligence, borne out by sufficient intelligence that there is no doubt in my mind that is what happened, and as I think I said to you either before the conflict started or possibly even in the course of it, one benefit of that was that it was going to be far more difficult for them to reconstitute that material to use in a situation of conflict, and in any event as you know, we were giving very strong warnings to the commanders in the field as to what would happen if they did. But I suggest to people - before people crow about the absence of weapons of mass destruction, I suggest they wait a little bit because there is a very deliberative process in place here, and there is no doubt that weapons of mass destruction existed, that they have been subject to this systematic campaign of concealment, and I hope that you understand that for very obvious reasons we are anxious not to start making the claims until we have absolutely bottomed out anything by way of information that comes to us.
10 Downing Street - UK Press Conference, published 04-28-2003

THERE may be NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw admitted yesterday.

He told the Commons that war was declared because the regime had ONCE been in possession of them.

And he insisted they did not have to be found to justify the invasion.

His astonishing U-turn stunned MPs on all sides of the Commons - and came hours after Tony Blair again insisted that weapons were there and would be found.
The Daily Mirror, published 04-29-2003

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said Saddam Hussein's regime was "very successful" in hiding its weapons of mass destruction, and said coalition forces would be more likely to find them "when we find the people who know where they are, who were involved in the programs and were involved in hiding [them]." ...

He told MBC that the former Iraqi regime "dispersed these weapons and they dispersed the documentation all across the country in various locations, hid them and did so very successfully, which is why the inspectors didn't find anything," and speculated that, like United Nations weapons inspectors, coalition forces "very likely will not find anything either immediately."

However, "[w]e'll find the people who managed to hide the documents, the people who managed to do the work, and at some point when they're no longer frightened of Saddam Hussein, and they're willing to talk, they will come to us," said Rumsfeld on MBC.

[The summary above taken from here]
State Dept - Transcript of remarks on Middle East Broadcasting (MBC), published 04-29-2003

Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on.
Remarks by the President from the USS Abraham Lincoln, San Diego, CA, published 05-01-2003

President George Bush's National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, is now acknowledging that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program is less clear-cut, and probably more difficult to establish, than the White House portrayed before the war.

She has no doubt that the US-led coalition, assisted by experts from Britain and Australia, will find Iraq's WMD programs. But for the first time, Dr Rice is saying publicly that it is less likely many actual weapons will be found. ....

According to Dr Rice, the weapons programs are "in bits and pieces" rather than assembled weapons. "You may find assembly lines, you may find pieces hidden here and there," she said.

She had a new explanation too for Iraq's ability to launch these weapons that were not assembled. "Just-in-time assembly" and "just-in-time" inventory, as she put it.

But in the months before the Iraq war, Mr Bush and his advisers, including the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, gave far more frightening descriptions of Iraq's stockpile of weapons of mass destruction.
The Sydney Morning Herald, published 05-01-2003

Q: Sir, in honor of your guest, I'll ask it in Australian, if that's all right. (Laughter.) Is there a possibility that you may never find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? And how would that square with your rationale for going to war?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes -- the question is about weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The United States -- United Nations Security Council voted 1441, which made the declaration it had weapons of mass destruction. It's well-known it had weapons of mass destruction. And we've also got to recognize that he spent 14 years hiding weapons of mass destruction. I mean, he spent an entire decade making sure that inspectors would never find them. Iraq's the size of the state of California. It's got tunnels, caves, all kinds of complexes. We'll find them. And it's just going to be a matter of time to do so.
President Bush, P.M. Howard Discuss Operation Iraqi Freedom, published 05-03-2003

QUESTION: Sir, the rationale to go to war was to find weapons of mass destruction. We have not found them yet.

SECRETARY POWELL: We will.

QUESTION: They went to a site today and they found it had been looted. Now, what does that mean?

SECRETARY POWELL: I don't know. I don't know whether there was anything in the site that was of particular concern to us. I'm still -- I'll wait for the intelligence community to give us an assessment of that. I just saw a Washington Post report about it.

QUESTION: Do you think that the rationale has changed?

SECRETARY POWELL: The rationale was the same. There was the weapons of mass destruction. Let's be clear. The basis of UN Security Council Resolution 1441, was a judgment on the part of all 15 members of the Security Council, that the Iraqi regime had been in violation of its obligations under all sorts of previous resolutions to account for its weapons of mass destruction. All 15 nations agreed when they passed that resolution. And I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.
Remarks After Interview With NBC's Meet the Press, published 05-04-2003

Q: Mr. President, Defense officials are now saying they are confident they have found a mobile biological lab, exactly what Secretary Powell described before the United Nations. Are you aware of the details? What can you tell us about that? And has Secretary Rumsfeld given you any details?

THE PRESIDENT: I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program. I will leave the details of your question to the experts, but one thing we know is that he had a weapons program. We also know he spent years trying to hide the weapons program. And over time the truth will come out and the American people will see that when we rid Saddam Hussein from -- got him out of power, we made America more secure.

Q: Would you mind if we ask Secretary Rumsfeld if he could share --

SECRETARY RUMSFELD: I like the President's answer.

[Note to reader: Around this time, and more frequently later, is when the rhetoric began to change from "weapons of mass destruction" to "weapons program". Also, the 'mobile biological labs' were later determined to be used "for the production of hydrogen to fill artillery balloons". See entry date 06/15/2003 which links to this article.]
President Names Envoy to Iraq, published 05-06-2003

Today I removed the sanctions imposed by the United States against Iraq's old government. First, based on the authority recently given to me by Congress, I am suspending the Iraq Sanctions Act, which restricts the export of certain equipment necessary for Iraq's reconstruction.
Press Availability with Bush and President Aznar of Spain, published 05-07-2003

Q Well, we went to war, didn't we, to find these -- because we said that these weapons were a direct and imminent threat to the United States? Isn't that true?

MR. FLEISCHER: Absolutely. One of the reasons that we went to war was because of their possession of weapons of mass destruction. And nothing has changed on that front at all. We said what we said because we meant it. We had the intelligence to report it. Secretary Powell said it. And I may point out to you, as you may know, there is a news conference at Department of Defense today at 2:00 p.m. to discuss one element in this.

And so we have always had confidence, we continue to have confidence that WMD will be found.
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 05-07-2003

Q: Ari, is the President disturbed that you have not found weapons of mass destruction, you have not found Saddam Hussein, you have not found bin Laden, you have not found the anthrax dealer? I mean, it seems to me all of these things are a dead-end. What's his feeling?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think the President looks at this at two levels: one is the accomplishment of the overall mission, and, two, some of the component parts of the overall mission. In terms of the fight against those who attacked our country on September 11th, the al Qaeda, harbored by the Taliban, there is no question this has been a successful mission. The abilities of al Qaeda have been severely diminished, and the President is grateful for that happening.

Obviously, Osama bin Laden has not been captured. But as you look at all the operations -- just ask Khalid Sheik Mohammed how he feels about our ability to track people down. So, over time, the President is confident that there will be additional arrests. But this is about more than one man as the President has repeatedly said. The mission against al Qaeda continues.

Vis-a-vis Iraq, clearly this, too, was a successful operation, a successful operation. ...
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 05-07-2003

Senior British diplomatic and military staff gave Tony Blair explicit warnings three years ago that the US was disastrously mishandling the occupation of Iraq, according to leaked memos.

John Sawers, Mr Blair's envoy in Baghdad in the aftermath of the invasion, sent a series of confidential memos to Downing Street in May and June 2003 cataloguing US failures. [...]

The British memos identified a series of US failures that contained the seeds of the present insurgency and anarchy.

The mistakes include:

· A lack of interest by the US commander, General Tommy Franks, in the post-invasion phase.

· The presence in the capital of the US Third Infantry Division, which took a heavyhanded approach to security.

· Squandering the initial sympathy of Iraqis.

· Bechtel, the main US civilian contractor, moving too slowly to reconnect basic services, such as electricity and water.

· Failure to deal with health hazards, such as 40% of Baghdad's sewage pouring into the Tigris and rubbish piling up in the streets.

· Sacking of many of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath party, even though many of them held relatively junior posts.

Mr Sawers, in a memo titled Iraq: What's Going Wrong, written on May 11, four days after he had arrived in Baghdad, is uncompromising about the US administration in Baghdad. He wrote: "No leadership, no strategy, no coordination, no structure and inaccessible to ordinary Iraqis."
The Guardian, published 03-14-2006

The recent surrender of a key Iraqi biological weapons scientist gives the Bush administration another potential source of help in finding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction — a key justification for the war that remains to be proven true. ...

A failure to find proof could undermine future efforts by the Bush administration to use intelligence as a basis for its doctrine of military pre-emption against enemy states. ...

The problem for the administration is that nothing has been found yet to substantiate U.S. claims that were sweeping and precise: Iraq had technology for enriching uranium for nuclear weapons; Iraq had weaponized thousands of liters of anthrax, aflatoxin and botulinum; and some of these weapons could be launched on as little as 45 minutes notice. ...
USA Today, published 05-12-2003

As noted, coalition forces have operations underway to identify, secure, exploit and dismantle Iraqi WMD capabilities, facilities and stockpiles. This is a huge undertaking and we are in the early stages of this effort.

We have found evidence of the WMD programs, but we have a long way to go before we can gain a complete understanding of them. As we noted in connection with the UN inspection process, there is no way that we can find WMD materials that have been hidden unless those involved in the program tell us where to look.

We have detained many major figures involved in the WMD programs, including Mrs. Ammash (Mrs. Anthrax) from the biological warfare program and Dr. Taha (Dr. Germ) from the chemical warfare program. We are beginning to question them. Daily we round up more individuals who held high positions in Saddam’s regime, and we are confident we will find many other key scientists and technical personnel.

Of the roughly 600 WMD sites we currently know about, we have only searched about 20%. And we are learning about new sites every day.

I am confident that we will eventually be able to piece together a fairly complete account of Iraq’s WMD programs – but the process will take months and perhaps years.
Testimony on Post-War Iraq - Committee on International Relations, published 05-13-2003

"I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons."

-- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, May 14.

[Note to reader: Quote from Rumsfeld's answer to a question from Senator Byrd during a session of Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, May 14, 2003. For transcript of the hearing, go here, then do a text search for the phrase "NUCLEAR CAPABILITIES IN IRAQ"]
Washington Post , published 05-20-2003

...Condoleezza Rice said the United States was sending a new team to Iraq to scour the country for evidence.

The new team will be "more expert" at following the paper trail and other intelligence. She said Iraq appeared to have had a virtually "inspections proof" system of concealing chemical and biological weapons by developing chemicals and agents that could be used for more than one purpose, but that could be put together as weapons at the last minute. She said U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.

[Note to reader: Original Reuters article no longer available on their website.]
Reuters, published 05-14-2003

The Bush administration has changed its tune on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the reason it went to war there. Instead of looking for vast stocks of banned materials, it is now pinning its hopes on finding documentary evidence. The change in rhetoric, apparently designed in part to dampen public expectations, has unfolded gradually in the past month as special U.S. military teams have found little to justify the administration's claim that Iraq was concealing vast stocks of chemical and biological agents and was actively working on a covert nuclear weapons program.

[Note to reader: Original Reuters article no longer available on their website.]
Reuters, published 05-14-2003

Federal law enforcement organizations -- and some state and local authorities -- ramped up vigilance when the Department of Homeland Security's color-coded national terror alert level was raised May 20 from "elevated," or yellow, to "high," or orange, the top domestic anti-terrorism official said today on Capitol Hill. ...

The combination of current intelligence information, the recent terrorist attacks in Morocco and Saudi Arabia, and the release of the purported al Qaeda audiotape message convinced national leaders the terror alert level needed to be raised, Ridge noted.

[This High (Orange) Threat level remains in effect until May 30, 2003 when it was lowered to Elevated (Yellow)]
Dept of Defense - American Forces Press Service, published 05-22-2003

General. The attached charts reflect information on the account balances, sources and uses of the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI), which is managed by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), in consultation with the Iraqi Governing Council, the Iraqi Minister of Finance, and the Governor of the Central Bank of Iraq.

Background. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483, dated 21 May 2003, sanctioned the establishment of the Development Fund for Iraq.

Resolution 1483 and the laws and usages of war, authorized the Coalition Provisional Authority as the administrator of the Fund. At the request of the CPA Administrator in May, 2003, the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of New York established the "Central Bank of Iraq-Development Fund for Iraq" account. The DFI is held on the books of the Central Bank of Iraq. The corpus of the DFI is held in the account at FRBNY for the Central Bank of Iraq. A portion of the fund has been transferred to Baghdad, Iraq and used to establish a DFI-Baghdad account at the Central Bank of Iraq, for the purpose of meeting cash payment requirements in country, for the benefit of the Iraqi people.

International Advisory and Monitoring Board. The purpose of the International Advisory and Monitoring Board (IAMB) is to promote the objectives set forth in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 (2003) of ensuring that the DFI is used in a transparent manner for the purposes set out in paragraph 14 of that resolution and that export sales of petroleum, petroleum products and natural gas from Iraq are made consistent with prevailing international market best practices. The IAMB has the responsibility to approve the independent public accountants selected and appointed by the CPA to audit the DFI as required by UNSCR 1483. In this regards, the IAMB will perform functions similar to those of an external audit committees for the CPA. The IAMB website is here.

[Note to reader: President Bush's Statement on U.N. Vote Lifting Sanctions on Iraq and his Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has An Interest.]
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), published 05-22-2003

In a previous interview with Vanity Fair, Paul Wolfowitz admits, “For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.”
Dept of Defense Transcript - Washington Post, published 05-28-2003

Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, has suggested for the first time that chemical and biological weapons might not be found in Iraq, saying Saddam Hussein may have destroyed them before the war began. ...

The hunt for the weapons had been under way for only seven weeks, he said. Iraqi scientists were still being interviewed and there were still hundreds of suspected chemical and biological weapons sites to be examined. But he added: "It is also possible that they decided that they would destroy them prior to a conflict."
The Telegraph, published 05-29-2003

Q: But, still, those countries who didn't support the Iraqi Freedom operation use the same argument, weapons of mass destruction haven't been found. So what argument will you use now to justify this war?

THE PRESIDENT: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them.

[For follow-up to this statement, please see entry dated 6/15/03 "Iraqi mobile labs nothing to do with germ warfare, report finds" and which links to article in The Guardian.]
Interview of the President by TVP, Poland, published 05-29-2003

Q Is the President satisfied with the intelligence he got before the war? Because now one Cabinet officer is saying that they buried the weapons; another said they destroyed them; and another official said they -- what is the President's view on all this?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President is indeed satisfied with the intelligence that he received. And I think that's borne out by the fact that, just as Secretary Powell described at the United Nations, we have found the bio trucks that can be used only for the purpose of producing biological weapons. That's proof-perfect that the intelligence in that regard was right on target.

Q We go to war for two trucks?

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm sorry?

Q You would go to war from the finding of two trucks?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I don't think it's anything to dismiss. Iraq had, contrary to their protestations to the United Nations, trucks for the purpose of producing biological weapons. They said they didn't have them; they got caught -- proof-perfect that they had them. The only use for those trucks is to produce biological weapons. And so that's one item of it. And on the rest of all the intelligence, of course, the President continues to be satisfied with it. He thinks it's borne out. [...]
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 05-29-2003

Lt. Gen. James Conway, commander of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, said in a video teleconference from his headquarters in southern Iraq that he was convinced before and during the war that at least some Republican Guard units had been provided with chemical weapons.

"It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites," he told reporters at the Pentagon.

"Believe me, it's not for lack of trying," he added. "We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there."
USA Today, published 05-30-2003

The Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Homeland Security Council, has lowered the national threat level from Code Orange or high risk of terrorist attack to Code Yellow or an elevated risk of terrorist attack.

This decision is based upon a number of factors including a review of the intelligence and assessment of threats. The U.S. intelligence community has also concluded that the number of indicators and warnings that led to raising the level have decreased and the heightened vulnerability associated with the Memorial Day holiday has passed.

[This Elevated (Yellow) Threat level remains in effect until Dec. 21, 2003 when it was raised to High (Orange)]
Statement by Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge , published 05-30-2003

Kroft: Mr. Secretary, we've gotten some questions that have been sent in by e-mail, and I wanted to read one to you. It begins, "In the months leading up to the war with Iraq, both the United States and British governments claimed that they had compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. Because of national security, the exact nature of the information could not be revealed. We are now some seven weeks into the occupation of Iraq, and I have to ask where are the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction? Was this war waged under a false pretext, or are there intelligence-gathering failures? An affirmative answer to either would be unsettling." ...

Rumsfeld: Well, I can assure you that this war was not waged under any false pretext. The material that Secretary Powell presented to the world and the United Nations, and the material that Prime Minister Blair and his government in England presented to the world, was intelligence information that had been gathered, accumulated and was appropriate for declassification.

We believed then, and we believe now, that the Iraqis have -- had chemical weapons, biological weapons, and that they had a program to develop nuclear weapons, but did not have nuclear weapons. That is what the United Kingdom's intelligence suggested as well. We still believe that. ...

We never believed that we or inspectors would just suddenly trip over them and find them. We always believed that because he was so successful at hiding things and denial and deception, that when -- the way we would ultimately find them would be through other people telling us where they were -- defectors, people we capture, who finally decide to just tell the truth. And we still believe that's going to be the case.

We have teams of people that are out looking. They've investigated a number of sites. And within the last week or two, they have in fact captured and have in custody two of the mobile trailers that Secretary Powell talked about at the United Nations as being biological weapons laboratories.
Defense Dept Interview with Infinity Radio Connect, published 05-31-2003

Q Thank you. Mr. President, are there any new developments in the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Have any actual weapons been found? And to both of you leaders, can you say, do you see eye-to-eye on Iraq now, and its oil?

PRESIDENT BUSH: The first part of your question is that -- is whether or not the weapons of mass destruction question. Here's what -- we've discovered a weapons system, biological labs, that Iraq denied she had, and labs that were prohibited under the U.N. resolutions. [...]
Press Availability with President Bush and President Putin-St. Petersburg, Russia, published 06-01-2003

QUESTION: The last, the very last question. Back to Iraq, you didn’t find the smoking gun, did you?

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, there are smoking guns all over. Remember, Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. We found them in 1991. The inspectors found them when they went in. We destroyed some of their weapons of mass destruction in 1991. They have weapons of mass destruction, they’ve had them, they used them against Iran.
State Dept - Transcript of interview with Canale 5 TV, Italy, published 06-02-2003

Day by day, the United States and our coalition partners are making the streets safer for the Iraqi citizens. We also understand that a more just political system will develop when people have food in their stomachs, and their lights work, and they can turn on a faucet and they can find some clean water -- things that Saddam did not do for them. ...

After all, oil is now flowing. But this time the revenues are not going to be used and skimmed off by greedy gangsters. It's going to be used in a special account on behalf of the people who own the oil -- the citizens of Iraq.

One thing else we've done is we made sure that Iraq is not going to serve as an arsenal for terrorist -- for terrorist groups. We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents. This is a man who spent decades hiding tools of mass murder. He knew the inspectors were looking for them. You know better than me he's got a big country in which to hide them. We're on the look. We'll reveal the truth.

But one thing is certain: no terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the Iraqi regime is no more.
President Talks to Troops in Qatar, published 06-05-2003

There can be no question Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, Secretary of State Colin Powell said in remarks to the press following an interview on Fox News Sunday June 8.

"There can be no question that Iraq had and has had weapons of mass destruction. And now that we are sending in a 1,300-man team, I am sure we will be uncovering more of that capability," he said. Powell had been asked about charges circulating in the press that the Bush administration had pressured U.S. intelligence agencies on the Iraqi weapons issue.
Fox News Sunday, published 06-08-2003

"If you connected the dots about everything that we knew about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs going back to 1991 and going all the way up until March 2003 when we launched the attack against Iraq, you could come to only one conclusion, and that was that this was an active program, that this was a dangerous program, this was a prorgram that was effectively concealed.

"At the time that the State of the Union address was prepared, there were also other sources that said that they were – the Iraqis were seeking yellow cake uranium oxide from Africa and that was taken out a British report. Clearly, that particular report, we learned subsequently, subsequently was not credible. George, I am telling you that when this was raised with the intelligence community they said what we could say. And there were other attempts to get yellow cake from Africa. But the important thing here is that this case about the nuclear weapons program did not rest on a document that the British cited. This case rested on Saddam Hussein's infrastructure for the development of nuclear weapons, it rested on procurement activities to try and acquire pieces of --centrifuges that might be used...

"But when you look at the picture, and you ask yourself, did people believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? Yes... He was clearly concealing a program and that's separable from what we will find out about the nature of that program, where these weapons are, what – how he was concealing it. We've always known that the strongest evidence about the Iraqi programs will come from talking to people who were involved in them."

[Note to reader: The National Security Council website does not have this interview, nor were we able to locate it at any other site on the web in its entirety. Small quotes from this interview are available on a wide variety of websites, but the website with the most passages comes from the Carnegie Endownment for International Peace at the link below. Please scroll down that page to June 8, 2003 for more passages.]
ABC - This Week with George Stephanapolous, published 06-08-2003

Tony Blair faces a fresh crisis over Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, as evidence emerges that two vehicles that he has repeatedly claimed to be Iraqi mobile biological warfare production units are nothing of the sort.
The intelligence agency MI6, British defence officers and technical experts from the Porton Down microbiological research establishment have been ordered to conduct an urgent review of the mobile facilities, following US analysis which casts serious doubt on whether they really are germ labs. [...]

The claim, however, that the two vehicles are mobile germ labs has been repeated frequently by both Blair and President George Bush in recent days in support of claims that they prove the existence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction..

During his whistle stop tour of the Gulf, Europe and Russia, Blair repeatedly briefed journalists that the trailers were germ production labs which proved that Iraq had WMD. [...]

'I have no great confidence that it's a fermenter,' a senior analyst said of a tank supposed to be capable of multiplying seed germs into lethal swarms. The government's public report, he said, 'was a rushed job and looks political'. The analyst had not seen the trailers, but reviewed evidence from them.

Another intelligence expert who has seen the trailers told the US paper: 'Everyone has wanted to find the "smoking gun" so much that they may have wanted to have reached this conclusion. I am very upset with the process.' [...]
The Guardian, published 06-08-2003

Q: Sir, is U.S. credibility on the line over weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: I'm not exactly sure what that means. I mean, Iraq had a weapons program. Intelligence throughout the decade showed they had a weapons program. I am absolutely convinced with time we'll find out that they did have a weapons program. The credibility of this country is based upon our strong desire to make the world more peaceful and the world is now more peaceful after our decision; the strong desire to make sure free nations are more secure -- our free nations are now more secure; and the strong desire to spread freedom. And the Iraqi people are now free and are learning the habits of freedom and the responsibilities that come with freedom.

I read a report that somehow, you know, that there is no al Qaeda presence in Baghdad. I guess the people who wrote that article forgot about Al Zarqawi's network inside of Baghdad that ordered the killing of a U.S. citizen named Foley. And history will show, history -- time will prove that the United States made the absolute right decision in freeing the people of Iraq from the clutches of Saddam Hussein.

[Note to reader: Regarding Abu Musab al Zarqawi, please see NBC Story, 3/02/04 for context.]
President Discusses Middle East, Iraq and the Dollar in Cabinet Meeting, published 06-09-2003

A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame [Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife] in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.

Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post. ...

Almost all of the memo is devoted to describing why State Department intelligence experts did not believe claims that Saddam Hussein had in the recent past sought to purchase uranium from Niger. Only two sentences in the seven-sentence paragraph mention Wilson's wife.

The memo was delivered to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell on July 7, 2003, as he headed to Africa for a trip with President Bush aboard Air Force One. Plame was unmasked in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak seven days later.

For additional information regarding "CIA Leak Case", go to
dKospedia OR Wikipedia
Washington Post , published 07-21-2005

Dear Dr. Rice:

Since March 17, 2003, I have been trying without success to get a direct answer to one simple question: Why did President Bush cite forged evidence about Iraq's nuclear capabilities in his State of the Union address?

Although you addressed this issue on Sunday on both Meet the Press and This Week with George Stephanopoulos, your comments did nothing to clarify this issue. In fact, your responses contradicted other known facts and raised a host of new questions.

During your interviews, you said the Bush Administration welcomes inquiries into this matter. Yesterday, the Washington Post also reported that Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet has agreed to provide "full documentation" of the intelligence information "in regards to Secretary Powell's comments, the president's comments and anybody else's comments." [1] Consistent with these sentiments, I am writing to seek further information about this important matter. ...

Conclusion

On Sunday, you stated that "there is now a lot of revisionism that says, there was disagreement on this data point, or disagreement on that data point." [18] I disagree strongly with this characterization. I am not raising questions about the validity of an isolated "data point," and the issue is not whether the war in Iraq was justified or not.

What I want to know is the answer to a simple question: Why did the President use forged evidence in the State of the Union address? This is a question that bears directly on the credibility of the United States, and it should be answered in a prompt and forthright manner, with full disclosure of all the relevant facts. ...
Henry Waxman, Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Government Reform (PDF), published 06-10-2003

Q: One question on the weapons of mass destruction issue. The President yesterday said three times in a row "weapons programs," rather than "weapons." Did the President intend to shift the focus here or establish a new position to in any way suggest a change in what he alleged before --

MR. FLEISCHER: No, as you know from listening to the President on this issue repeatedly, when the President talked about weapons programs, he includes weapons of mass destruction in that.

Q: So he means by weapons, weapons programs, he means weapons, themselves?

MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct.

Q: I mean, but he used "weapons programs" three times in a row. What should we make of that?

MR. FLEISCHER: You know how the President has addressed this issue repeatedly over time. I'm telling you I don't think you should make anything of it, because I know what the President meant. When he said "weapons programs," he includes weapons of mass destruction, as you heard him say on numerous occasions.

Q: So he uses them interchangeably?

MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct. He did yesterday.
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 06-10-2003

Q: Does it bother the President that he is asking for more time and patience in the search for weapons when he denied that request to the U.N.?

MR. FLEISCHER: This is something we discussed at great length yesterday, and there is a fundamental difference. The difference is, when those previously asking for patience ask for it, it didn't matter how patient anybody was, because Saddam Hussein was in charge of Iraq and nobody was going to find anything, nobody was going to make any progress, so long as Saddam Hussein hindered the ability of the inspectors to do their jobs. Patience wouldn't have accomplished anything.

We're now in the post-Saddam Hussein era where we have documents that we never would have had otherwise; we have access to sites that we never would have had otherwise; where we have the ability now to talk to individuals who previously would have been shot if they talked. And that totally changes the equation.

Q: -- worth going to war for that, for thousands of people to be killed?

MR. FLEISCHER: I think it was worth going to war to remove Saddam Hussein from power, yes.
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 06-10-2003

General Eric Ken Shinseki... was the 34th Chief of Staff of the United States Army, and retired from the post in 2003. During his tenure [1999-2003], he initiated an innovative, but controversial plan to make the Army lighter and faster by creating Stryker Brigade Combat Teams. ...

General Shinseki's retirement in 2003 has been a matter of some controversy, as it became a disputed point in the first of the 2004 U.S. presidential election debates. The Democratic candidate, John Kerry, made the claim that Shinseki was forcibly retired over his estimates of troop requirements for the 2003 Iraq War, which were much larger than predicted by the George W. Bush Administration, including Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Bush maintained that Shinseki had put in for retirement before the start of the war. Shinseki's own statement is that he was forced into retirement, though not necessarily over the specific question of troop requirements in Iraq.

[Note to reader: General Shinseki's farewell remarks at Retirement Ceremony. General Shinseki was succeeded by General Peter J. Schoomaker on August 1, 2003.]
Answers.com, published 06-11-2003

An official British investigation into two trailers found in northern Iraq has concluded they are not mobile germ warfare labs, as was claimed by Tony Blair and President George Bush, but were for the production of hydrogen to fill artillery balloons, as the Iraqis have continued to insist.
The conclusion by biological weapons experts working for the British Government is an embarrassment for the Prime Minister, who has claimed that the discovery of the labs proved that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction and justified the case for going to war against Saddam Hussein.

Instead, a British scientist and biological weapons expert, who has examined the trailers in Iraq, told The Observer last week: 'They are not mobile germ warfare laboratories. You could not use them for making biological weapons. They do not even look like them. They are exactly what the Iraqis said they were - facilities for the production of hydrogen gas to fill balloons.'

The conclusion of the investigation ordered by the British Government - and revealed by The Observer last week - is hugely embarrassing for Blair, who had used the discovery of the alleged mobile labs as part of his efforts to silence criticism over the failure of Britain and the US to find any weapons of mass destruction since the invasion of Iraq.
The Guardian, published 06-15-2003

Q: Ari, when you said earlier that Saddam must have had weapons of mass destruction because he had them and we don't have receipts for their destruction, and so forth, are you indicating that we went to war basically on an inference that he had to have them, or was there specific, credible evidence --

MR. FLEISCHER: This was asked before. It is based on intelligence information that led to the conclusion of this administration, the previous administration and many on the Hill that Saddam Hussein did indeed have weapons of mass destruction, of course.

Q: So there was enough specific, credible information of the existence of weapons, not any inference, but of the actual existence of weapons, there was enough of that to lead us to go to war?

MR. FLEISCHER: Let me give you an example --

Q: Can you answer that question before you --

MR. FLEISCHER: -- Saddam having weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein's militaristic history in which he had used weapons of mass destruction against others --

Q: I'm not asking about history. I'm specifically not asking about history. I'm asking about what we saw on the ground just before the war, did we know that those weapons were there.

MR. FLEISCHER: You cannot separate the two. You cannot separate history --

Q So you're saying that we did not have enough of that.

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm saying it's a combination; that the decision to go to war was based on the knowledge that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and Saddam Hussein had a history of using weapons of mass destruction, that he had a militaristic history; and that we successfully carried out a war, and did so in a way that Saddam Hussein was not able to use his weapons of mass destruction, that he may have had some of it destroyed, that he had it hidden, as part of a whole apparatus of concealment that he mastered over the years as he dealt with United Nations inspectors.

Q On the credible evidence that we did know about, whatever amount of that there was, I assume that our intelligence capabilities before the war are the same as they were -- as they are now. So how it is possible that we were able to discern those weapons before the war, but we can't when we have 200,000 troops on the ground?

MR. FLEISCHER: Let me give you a good example. These are the biological trucks* that Secretary Powell spoke of at the United Nations. When Secretary Powell spoke about those, he couldn't tell anybody exactly where they were, but we had intelligence information that he had them. Now, the inability to say exactly where they are does not disprove the fact that he has them. And of course, as time went along, Secretary Powell was proven exactly right and the intelligence community was proven exactly right about what they said on these trucks.

The President has said before that he is patient, the American people are patient and he is confident that in time we will find this. [*keywords: biological labs]
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 06-17-2003

Q: The apprehension of Mahmud al-Tikriti, do you see that as being a potential boon in your so-far fruitless hunt for weapons of mass destruction?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, one, on the interesting twist to your question at the end there, I do want to remind you about the capture of the biological weapons laboratories, which is not an insignificant finding, and fact about the capture of the biological labs. [...]

Q: Are you suggesting then that there is irrefutable evidence that the mobile labs that you claim were designed to produce biological weapons are, in fact, those laboratories?

MR. FLEISCHER: No, but I know you were saying that really as a throw-away line, but when you say "fruitless," I just want to make certain that people understand that this has been a very careful search, and a search that has turned up things that we have previously talked about applying to the weapons of mass destruction program that the Iraqis had.

Q: Understood, but unless it's absolutely confirmed that those were bio weapons labs, was my characterization not correct?

MR. FLEISCHER: I think your characterization does not apply to the weapons labs which we know have no other purpose other than for the production of biological weapons.

Q: So you're saying that there's no chance that they do produce hydrogen for weather balloons used in artillery?

MR. FLEISCHER: I think that theory is full of hot air. [...]
White House Press Briefing - Ari Fleisher, published 06-18-2003

Q. For both Presidents, the war on terror that you're both engaged in, there are two principals that are still at large. Could you tell us anything about the whereabouts of Usama bin Laden? Is he back in business in Pakistan? And what about Saddam Hussein? Is he back in Iraq?

President Bush. Well, let me start off. There's more than two principals at large. There are terrorists who are--still have designs on destabilizing the Pakistan Government and are destroying innocent life. You've named two. There are others around too, and we're just on the hunt. And we'll find them. It's a matter of time.

Thanks to President Musharraf's leadership, on the Al Qaida front we've dismantled the chief operators of Al Qaida. If Usama bin Laden is alive--and the President can comment on that if he cares to--but the people reporting to him, the chief operators, people like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, are no longer a threat to the United States or Pakistan for that matter. ...

President Musharraf. "...Now, if at all any Al Qaida operative is hiding in this region, we are after them. Now, whether Usama bin Laden is here or across the border, your guess, sir, will be as good as mine. So I wouldn't like to venture into a guess."
Press Conference at Camp David, published 06-24-2003

Q: And, Secretary Rumsfeld, can I just ask you -- follow-up on your statement about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. You said that -- in your opening statement, that there was no doubt before the war that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction "programs," was the word you used.

Rumsfeld: Yes.

Q: I'm just wondering, when I hear you say "programs," are you signaling at all that Iraq may not have had actual weapons or weaponized forms of this, but simply the programs to produce them? Or am I reading too much into what you said?

Rumsfeld: You may be reading too much. I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons.

Q: I didn't say nuclear --

Rumsfeld: I'm saying that. I'm trying to respond to your question.

I don't know anybody in any government or any intelligence agency who suggested that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons. That's fact number one.
Dept of Defense - News Briefing, published 06-24-2003

Q: Yeah, but where are the shells and the rockets that would have been fired, you know, for the grace of God hadn't been, but where are they? Speed works both ways. You overcome them, but you should have found something by now if it was such an imminent threat.

Myers: Well, it goes back to the whole issue of -- for the last 10, 12 years in Iraq, and the practice of denial and deception. It's the same reason that the first U.N. inspection regime didn't find everything, and why there was a second regime. They're masters of this.

And the other part of that is that, you know, you act off intelligence. Intelligence doesn't necessarily mean something is true. It's just -- it's intelligence. You know, it's your best estimate of the situation. It doesn't mean it's a fact. I mean, that's not what intelligence is. It's not -- they're -- and so you make judgments.
Dept of Defense - News Briefing, published 06-24-2003

Excluding forces deployed in direct support of Operation Enduring Freedom, there are probably about 218,000 military personnel in the CENTCOM area of responsibility, including about 775 aircraft of all types. The number of troops deployed in the area fluctuates on a daily basis as new forces surge into the region and some units begin to return to the United States.

Ground Forces in the region include a Patriot missile task force with two batteries deployed in Saudi Arabia and two in Kuwait. Virtually all of 3rd Infantry Division, 101st Airborne Division, 4th Infantry Division, 1st Armored Division, 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, 173rd Airborne Brigade, and an element of the 82nd Airborne Division have been deployed to Iraq. There are a significant number of echelon above division support units in the region. It is believed that the total Army presence in the region is nearly 114,000 soldiers. Army equipment figures are based on standard Tables of Organization and Equipment for the units deployed.

The number of Army mechanized equipment actually on the ground is thought to be roughly 814 M1 Abrams and 549 M2 Bradleys. There are 250 AH-64 Apache helicopters in the region.
GlobalSecurity.org, published 08-2005

In all, at least three teams of Western experts have now examined the trailers and evidence from them. While the first two groups to see the trailers were largely convinced that the vehicles were intended for the purpose of making germ agents, the third group of more senior analysts divided sharply over the function of the trailers, with several members expressing strong skepticism, some of the dissenters said.

In effect, early conclusions by agents on the ground that the trailers were indeed mobile units to produce germs for weapons have since been challenged. [...]

[Note to reader: this link goes to the NYT's paid article archive. We are currently looking for a link to a free source, until then you may read the text here.]
New York Times, published 06-26-2003

Q: Mr. President, a posse of small nations -- like the Ukraine and Poland -- are materializing to help keep the peace in Iraq. But with the attacks on U.S. forces and the casualty rates rising, what is the administration doing to get larger powers, like France and Germany and Russia, to join the American occupation there?

THE PRESIDENT: ...There are some who feel like -- that the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is, bring them on. We've got the force necessary to deal with the security situation.

[Additional reading beyond the comments at USA Today.]
White House News Conference, published 07-02-2003

"Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat. ....

I spent the next eight days ... meeting with dozens of people: current government officials, former government officials, people associated with the country's uranium business. It did not take long to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place.

Given the structure of the consortiums that operated the mines, it would be exceedingly difficult for Niger to transfer uranium to Iraq."

[Original NY Times article requires a fee to view. You can also read Joe Wilson's article at his website "Politics of Truth".]
New York Times , published 07-06-2003