>>>I think prez. Hussein was wielding the most dangerous weapon: empty rifle. That one scares on both sides of the barrel. On one side he was trying to convince Blix et al that he really didn't have anything, while still leaving some doubt so that Iran wouldn't think it's a good time to catch him unarmed.
>>
>>Could be, and maybe this is it in a nutshell for me... are we really *all* ready to believe that Saddam is the sole living proof against Lincoln's famous quote. Did he *really* fool "all the people all the time" for 11 years? Was the *rest of the world* mistaken and Saddam was right all along? He is smart... shrewd even and certainly lucky. But I don't personally believe he's capable of getting away with *all of this* for *all that time*. Not with the *world* watching and inspecting and sanctioning. Seems like someone would have uncovered the ruse and exposed the emperor in his clothes long ago. Otherwise, we're believing the *world* was incompetent for 11 years, while Saddam played the perfect hand during that same period?
>
>It's still possible that he played it all. Because, look - who'd be interested in learning the truth? Israel, probably the country with the best espionage in the region, certainly would, but it'd be in their best interest not to pass it on, specially not to USA. The surrounding Arab countries probably knew some of it, but then they wouldn't readily hand it to the West, for two kinds of reasons: first, they have a lot to complain about and little reason to help, and second, while the eyes of the West are on Iraq, they can breathe a little easier. European spies could have known something, or could have been purposely fed the same fodder about WMDs; eventually any contradicting reports would have been trumped by CIA's. And let's not forget that prez. Hussein was CIA's trainee and also a payee for a while. So he knew the ropes. And he also had some consulting help from Milosevic's generals while preparing for this war.
>
>So I wouldn't put it past him to have played the whole espionage community, just knowing their game and playing them against each other. With the power he had, it was far from impossible to do.
>
>>I tend toward the simpler explanation. The world's intelligence was right from the beginning. He was hiding weapons.
>
>Or pretending to have them hidden - the jury's still out on that one.
>
>> He was trying to procure and/or develop more. We (the world) were onto him.
>
>And the cheapest and simplest way to deter the West would be to create a mystery. Much cheaper and simpler than really finding a way to circumvent all the control, embargo etc.
>
>> He did something with the WMD, but won't tell us what he did. What we're left with now is second guessing, Monday morning quarterbacking, and politics.
>
>My WAG is that he destroyed what was known, and disassembled or hid the rest - though I don't think there would be much of that rest. Note that even his nuclear physicists were jobless for the last decade - even when CIA tried to approach some of them to produce evidence, there was nothing they could turn up.
>
>>>Maybe they've sworn never to tell which country sold them the chemicals, and just kept their word?
>>
>>Oh, I'm sure. Just as they've probably sworn never to tell who has the WMD now and plan to keeping their word on that one as well.
>
>Hint: the sales happened in '88 or so.

I believe Iran was reporting chemical attacks as early as '83