David Tucker writes--not in support of Hersh--to remind us that if the administration was right in saying that there was a "massive stockpile" of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, and if no such massive stockpile is found, then the victory in Iraq will be hollow because this will mean that those weapons will have been dispersed outside Iraq. The invasion, in other words, will have made things worse, if the war in Iraq was part of the war on terror. Furthermore, Tucker claims that Hersh missed the real story about how the Defense Department read the intelligence. He claims that, if no stockpile of WMD’s or direct terrorist connections are found, then it will appear more and more to the Arab world that the only reason we went to war in Iraq was to make Israel safe. And that could have the effect of increasing terrorism against us.
The link above goes to an article speculating on Saddam’s Location. Also interesting is this:
"Vellely also reports that satellite photos [and intelligence?] indicate that Iraqi WMDs were buried in the eastern Bekaa Valley of Lebanon by Syrian engineers. These include chemical weapons and some biological weapons. This activity took place from Jan 26 through early March."
"He also reports that information in the hands of military intelligence from Iraqi archives shows close ties between Chirac and his family to Saddam and his family and lots of corruption. In Vallely’s opinion this might cause "an earthquake" in French politics and the fall of the Chirac government."
If this is true what then?