| COMMENTATORS |
| |
Michael Novak |
" Saddam Hussein has failed to account
for more than 5000 liters... of anthrax which he is known to
have possessed just a few years ago... This does not include
the thousands of liters of botulin and other forms of biological
weapons, including nerve gas and sarin gas, reported by UN
inspectors to have been present in his arsenals. Nor does
it include the stockpiles of mustard gas the UN reported in
his possession. “Mustard gas is not like marmalade,”
Hans Blix famously announced in January. “Governments must
know exactly where it is, and what is done with every container
of it.” It is a deadly gas." Michael
Novak, American Enterprise Institute, February 10, 2003
|
| |
Dr Sue Wareham |
" Astonishingly our leaders, who
see Iraq’s alleged chemical and/or biological
weapons as a threat to the whole world, appear unperturbed by
the prospect of epidemics, famine and nuclear
conflagration in the Middle East." Dr
Sue Wareham, February 2003, in The Paper |
| |
James Woolsey |
" I think Saddam would not hesitate
at all to use chemical or, for that matter, bacteriological
weapons against Iraqis, Kurds, and Shi'ites, and against allied
forces. And if he could pull it off, I think he would not hesitate
at all to provide bacteriological weapons, which are a lot more
easily carried and more lethal per unit weight, substantially.
I think he would not hesitate to use bacteriological weapons
via terrorist groups more widely than in the Middle East, including
in Europe, or Britain especially, or here." James
Woolsey, American Enterprise Institute, seminar March
25, 2003 |
| ISSUES |
| |
|
|
Iraq
a chemical or bacteriological threat?