Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Seven days before our election? You don't see it?
|
Nope. In fact, the idea is absurd and I'm surprised that you would sign onto it.
As to the timing -- do you have blog cites to refute the reports that the Administration leaned on both the Iraqi government (for months) and the IAEA to delay reporting the loss and/or not do so at all?
Again, has the Interim Iraqi government said that it DID NOT send that report letter to the IAEA? Simple question, and you know Allawi would say it for Bush if it were so. What has McClellan said about this? Has anyone from the Adminsitration gone on record to say its a fake? it would not be hard for them to find out.
Plus, to make what you're proposing even remotely plausible, and even asuming El Baradei would ever do such a thing, the election would have to be far more heavily tilted in Kerry's favor and this "lie" would have to be far more important than 350 tons of high explosives.**
The reason that the IAEA functions reasonably well, and provides a reasonably effective framework for monitoring and/or disarming states of nuclear weapons is that its staff is composed of well-regarded neutral professionals. it is also a cooperative effort by its members. Credibility is its stock in trade.
I have never seen any reason to justify the antipathy of many of those on the right towards el Baradei or the IAEA. While they did not parrot the U.S. line on Iraq, it turns out they were right. We're working with them on Iran and North Korea, as well as the multitude of less prominent disarmament issues. Come on!
Not all foreign officials who fail to suck our collective dick are enemies of the Nation.
S_A_M
**After all, on the scale of alleged administration incompetencies in Iraq this is pretty minor, and everyone has known for a long time that the U.S. did not secure even key nuclear facilities promptly during the invasion.
