UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

29 August 2002

Cheney Warns of Threat from Saddam Hussein's Regime

(Says Iraq no doubt has offensive weapons of mass destruction) (4461)
Vice President Dick Cheney said August 29 that the regime of Saddam
Hussein in Iraq poses a grave threat to the safety of the Middle East,
the United States and the peace of the entire world.
Speaking in San Antonio, Texas, to Korean War Veterans, the vice
president expanded on what he said three days earlier in an August 26
speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Nashville, Tennessee.
There is "no doubt," Cheney said, that Saddam's regime has offensive
weapons of mass destruction "for the purpose of inflicting death on a
massive scale," developed so that Saddam "can hold the threat over the
head of anyone he chooses in his own region or beyond."
The vice president added that "on the nuclear question, many of us are
convinced that Saddam will acquire such weapons fairly soon."
Even if weapons inspectors were to return to Iraq, Cheney said, "with
Saddam's record of thwarting inspections, one has to be concerned that
he would continue to plot, using the available time to husband his
resources, to invest in his ongoing chemical and biological weapons
programs and to gain the possession of nuclear weapons."
In this age of global terrorism the "old doctrines of security do not
apply," the vice president said.
"Containment is not possible," he said, "when dictators obtain weapons
of mass destruction and are prepared to share them with terrorists who
intend to inflect catastrophic losses on the United States."
President Bush, "will proceed cautiously, and deliberately and
consider all possible options to deal with the threat that Iraq ruled
by Saddam Hussein represents," Cheney said.
He "will consult widely with Congress," and with U.S. friends and
allies around the world before deciding on a course of action.
The president, Cheney added, "welcomes the debate" on Iraq and has
made it clear to his national security team that he wants it to
participate fully in hearings to be held in Congress in September "on
this vitally important issue."
The elected leaders of the United States, Cheney added, "have a
responsibility to consider all available options and we are doing so.
What we must not do in the face of a mortal threat is to give in to
wishful thinking or to willful blindness.
"We must not simply look away, hope for the best, and leave the matter
for some future administration to resolve. As President Bush has said,
'time is not on our side,'" said the vice president.
"Deliverable weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a terror
network or a murderous dictator or the two working together
constitutes as grave a threat as can be imagined. The risks of
inaction are far greater than the risk of action," he said.
The vice president said that a regime change in Iraq "would bring
about a number of benefits to the entire region," including
enhancement of the U.S. ability to advance the Israeli-Palestinian
peace process.
"With our help, a liberated Iraq could be a great nation once again,"
he said. "Our goal would be an Iraq that has territorial integrity, a
government that is democratic and pluralistic, a nation where the
human rights of every ethnic and religious group are recognized and
respected," Cheney said.
Earlier in the day, President Bush in a speech in Oklahoma City, said
"we want to make it clear to our friends and allies and foes" that
we're in the war against terror "for the long pull. There is no
calendar on my desk that says, by such and such a date we're quitting.
When it comes to the defense of freedom, when it comes to the defense
of the values we hold dear, this United States will be relentless and
tough, and we will be victorious," Bush said.
Following is a transcript of Cheney's remarks:
(begin transcript)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Vice President
August 29, 2002
Marriott River Front Hotel San Antonio, Texas
REMARKS OF THE VICE PRESIDENT TO VETERANS OF KOREAN WAR
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you, and thank you,
Colonel. It's a very special privilege to be here this afternoon, and
I appreciate that warm welcome. Just last month, I had the opportunity
in Washington to be part of the presentation ceremony for veterans and
family members receiving the Republic of Korea Service Medal. And I
appreciate this opportunity once again to join with so many
distinguished veterans of the Korean War. And I bring good wishes to
all of you from the seat of power -- Crawford, Texas. (Laughter and
applause.)
I know you all feel especially welcome here in President Bush's home
state, and in this great city of San Antonio -- as the Colonel pointed
out, the site of the Alamo. The armed forces have a tremendous
presence in this community, at Brooks, Lackland, and Randolph Air
Forces bases -- and of course at Fort Sam Houston, the place where
military aviation was born, and where Dwight Eisenhower was first
posted as a second lieutenant. San Antonio is a proud military town,
and I know the residents of this community are honored by your
presence.
I, too, am honored to be with you. Colonel Gray was very thoughtful to
send me an invitation some months ago, and I couldn't have been more
pleased to accept. And in this room I see more than a few friends, and
many personal heroes. You share the experience of serving in America
in an hour of need -- of showing incredible strength, endurance, and
character in the worst imaginable conditions. And you gained that
experience in what has been called "the war that America forgot to
remember."
I was struck by an item that appeared in the corrections column of a
major newspaper several months ago. It seems that the obituary of
Colonel William Barber -- a Medal of Honor recipient known to all of
you -- the paper described Chosin Reservoir as "one of the worst
defeats in Marine Corps history." Well, they may not have checked with
many Marines before they printed that. But something tells me they
heard from Marines after they printed it. In any event, the editors
had to run a correction to point out that the American action was a
"series of tactical victories in the course of a fighting withdrawal."
The paper did right by correcting that record. But it does tell us
something when, even fifty years after the fact, there's still a lot
of misinformation out there. At the first reunion of the Chosin Few,
I'm told, one member of your group said that he asked his children
what they teach in the schools about the Korean War. The kids replied,
"What war?"
Fortunately, that was a long time ago, and Americans already familiar,
now, with the tremendous accomplishments of America's armed forces not
only in World War Two and Vietnam have been reminded once again of the
tremendous contribution that all of you made in Korea. Visitors to the
Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington now see the names of more than
58,000 Americans lost in that conflict, over a period of more than a
decade. Nearby, of course, at the Korean War Veterans Memorial, a lot
of people are surprised to learn that in Korea we lost almost that
many in just three years' time, the length of the Korean conflict. A
good number of you, I'm sure, have seen that memorial -- with the
figures of 19 troops, fitted for battle, moving toward the American
flag. One visitor asked a Korean veteran if he liked the statues. He
did. But, he said, "If you want to know what Korea was like," come
back and "look at them when it's 10 degrees below zero, snowing and
sleeting."
The Korean War Memorial, together with the 50th anniversary
observances, has done a great deal to reacquaint the nation with the
history of that conflict. When the conflict began, our military was
greatly weakened by years of demobilization, and was scarcely prepared
for what lay ahead. It was, said one soldier, "a war of fists and
rifle butts" -- where weapons rusted in the monsoons of summer, and
froze solid during the coldest Korean winter in a hundred years; where
many who fell into enemy hands were treated with almost unimaginable
brutality. Yet in Korea were written some of the most notable chapters
in military history -- among them General MacArthur's brilliantly
conceived landing at Inchon, the intense struggle for Pork Chop Hill,
the Eighth Army's phenomenal defense of the Pusan Perimeter, and, of
course, the successful fighting withdrawal from the death trap of the
Chosin Reservoir.
Military historians have properly termed Chosin Reservoir "the most
violent small unit fighting in the history of warfare" and "one of
those military masterpieces that occur when skill and bravery fuse to
defy rational expectation." This is not the audience for a recitation
of those facts; you all know firsthand what happened there. I will say
that I hope and pray that greater and greater numbers of Americans
will, over time, learn and understand what the Chosin Few did for our
nation.
Americans must know names like Lieutenant Colonel, later General, Ray
Davis, who led the First Battalion against a numerically superior and
ferocious enemy force, pressing on through deep snow into the face of
withering fire, carrying all his wounded with him, taking and holding
vital terrain and saving a rifle company from annihilation. We all
should know, of course, about how Colonel Barber, felled by gunfire,
maintained personal control of Company F, commanding his troops from a
stretcher.
We need to know about men who fought for weeks on end, having as their
only shelter the holes they scooped in the snow. About how General
Smith, exhausted and overburdened, gained new strength simply by
hearing the sound coming from a warming tent: It was a group of
enlisted men singing the Marine Corps Hymn.
We need to remember, as well, that in addition to those who died, more
than ninety thousand others came home wounded from that war. And even
at this hour several thousand remain missing: brave men last seen
doing their duty, honored and remembered by their country, which will
persist in our effort to account for every last one of them.
The cause America stood for in Korea -- joined by forces from many
countries -- was noble and just. It was the cause of human freedom. It
was a struggle to determine, as General Ridgway put it, "Whether the
rule of men who shoot their prisoners, enslave their citizens, and
deride the dignity of man shall displace the rule of those to whom the
individual and individual rights are sacred."
Because so many sacrificed in that cause, South Korea is today a land
that enjoys progress and prosperity, its people free from repression,
scarcity, and starvation -- the daily conditions of life in North
Korea. President Bush has observed that satellite photos of the Korean
Peninsula at night show the North in almost complete darkness. South
Korea, on the other hand, is bathed in light -- a vibrant,
enterprising society; a prosperous democracy sharing ties of commerce
and cooperation with many nations all over the globe; a peaceful and
talented people who have built the third-largest economy in Asia.
We look to the day when the light of freedom and progress covers all
of Korea, and stability on the Peninsula rests on a foundation of
peaceful reconciliation. Until then, stability will be maintained by
our great military alliance. Thirty-seven thousand American troops
proudly serve in Korea today. We will maintain our presence there.
America's commitment to peace in the region, and to security for our
friends, is unshakable.
Our people stationed in South Korea today follow in the finest of
traditions, going back to all of you -- and to the millions of others
who have honored this country by their military service. In these last
ten months, the people of the United States have been inspired once
again by the bravery and selflessness of our armed forces. And I can
say, as a former Secretary of Defense, I have never been more proud of
the America's military.
Our military will carry out many critical missions as we fight the
global war against terror. As Secretary Rumsfeld recently put it, we
are still closer to the beginning of this war than we are to the end
of it. We have entered a struggle of years -- a new kind of war
against a new kind of enemy. The terrorists who struck America are
ruthless, they are resourceful, and they hide in many countries. They
came into our country to murder thousands of innocent men, women, and
children. And there is no doubt but that they wish to strike again,
and that they are working to acquire the very deadliest weapons.
Against such enemies, America and the civilized world have only one
option: wherever terrorists operate, we must stop them, stop them in
their planning, and one by one bring them to justice.
In Afghanistan, the Taliban regime and al Qaeda terrorists have met
the fate that they chose for themselves. And they saw, up close and
personal, the new methods and capabilities of America's armed forces.
For whatever lies ahead, our men and women in uniform deserve the very
best weapons, the very best equipment, the best support, and the best
training we can possibly provide them. And under President Bush they
will have them all. The President has asked Congress for a one-year
increase of more than $48 billion for national defense, the largest
increase since Ronald Reagan lived in the White House. And for the
good of the nation's military families, he has also asked Congress to
provide every man and woman in uniform with a pay raise. We think
they've earned it.
In this war, we have assembled a broad coalition of civilized nations
that recognize the danger and that are working with us on all fronts.
The President has made very clear that there is no neutral ground in
the fight against terror. Those who harbor terrorists share guilt for
the acts they commit. And under the Bush Doctrine, a regime that
harbors or supports terrorists will be regarded as an enemy of the
United States.
The Taliban has already learned that lesson, but Afghanistan was only
the beginning of a lengthy campaign. Were we to stop now, any sense of
security we have would be only temporary. There is a terrorist
underworld out there around the globe, spread to more than 60
countries. The job we have will require every tool of diplomacy,
finance, intelligence, law enforcement, and military power. But we
will, over time, find and defeat the enemies of the United States. In
the case of Osama bin Laden -- as President Bush said recently -- "If
he's alive, we'll get him. If he's not alive, we already got him."
(Laughter.) A Texas saying, I think. (Laughter and applause.)
But the challenges to our country involve more than just tracking down
a single person or one small group. 9/11 and its aftermath awakened
this nation to danger, to the true ambitions of the global terror
network, and to the reality that weapons of mass destruction are being
sought by determined enemies who would not hesitate to use them
against us.
It is a certainty that the al Qaeda network is pursuing such weapons,
and has succeeded in acquiring at least a crude capability to use
them. We found evidence of their efforts in the caves and tunnels of
al Qaeda hideouts in Afghanistan. And we've seen in recent days
additional confirmation in tapes played on CNN -- pictures of al Qaeda
members training to commit acts of terror, and testing chemical
weapons on dogs. Those terrorists who remain at large are determined
to use these capabilities against the United States and against our
friends and allies around the world.
As we face this prospect, old doctrines of security do not apply. In
the days of the Cold War, we were able to manage the threat with
strategies of deterrence and containment. But it's a lot tougher to
deter enemies who have no country to defend. And containment is not
possible when dictators obtain weapons of mass destruction and are
prepared to share them with terrorists who intend to inflict
catastrophic losses on the United States.
In the case of Saddam Hussein, we have a dictator who was defeated in
the Persian Gulf War, and who agreed at the time to the destruction of
all of his weapons of mass destruction. In the past decade, however,
Saddam has systematically broken all of these agreements. His regime
is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and
biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear
weapons program. These are not weapons designed for the purpose of
defending Iraq; these are offensive weapons for the purpose of
inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein
can hold the threat over the head of anyone he chooses, in his own
region or beyond.
On the nuclear question, many of us are convinced that Saddam will
acquire such weapons fairly soon. Just how soon, we cannot really
judge. Intelligence is at best an uncertain business, even under the
best circumstances. This is especially the case when you are dealing
with a totalitarian government that has made a science out of
deceiving the international community. One must keep in mind the
history of U.N. inspection teams in Iraq. Even as they were conducting
the most intrusive system of arms control in history, the inspectors
often missed a great deal. Before being barred from the country, the
inspectors found and destroyed thousands of chemical weapons, and
hundreds of tons of mustard gas and other nerve agents.
Yet Saddam Hussein had sought to frustrate and deceive them at every
turn, and was often successful in doing so. At one point in 1995, the
inspectors were actually on the verge of declaring that Saddam's
programs to develop chemical weapons and ballistic missiles had been
fully accounted for and shut down. In time, aided by information from
defectors and other sources, they discovered that Saddam Hussein had
kept them largely in the dark about the extent of his program to
mass-produce VX, one of the deadliest chemicals known to man. And far
from having shut down Iraq's prohibited missile programs, the
inspectors found that Saddam had continued to test such missiles,
almost literally under the noses of U.N. inspectors.
Many have suggested that the problem can be dealt with simply by
returning inspectors to Iraq. But we must remember that inspections
are not an end in themselves. The objective has to be disarmament; to
compel Iraqi compliance with the U.N. Security Council Resolutions
that call for the complete destruction of Saddam's weapons of mass
destruction and an end to all efforts to develop or produce more
chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons.
With Saddam's record of thwarting inspections, one has to be concerned
that he would continue to plot, using the available time to husband
his resources, to invest in his ongoing chemical and biological
weapons programs, and to gain the possession of nuclear weapons.
Should all his ambitions be realized, the implications would be
enormous for the Middle East, for the United States, and for the peace
of the world. The whole range of weapons of mass destruction then
would rest in the hands of a dictator who has already shown his
willingness to use such weapons, and has done so, both in his war with
Iran and against his own people. Armed with an arsenal of these
weapons of terror, and sitting atop ten percent of the world's oil
reserves, Saddam Hussein could then be expected to seek domination of
the entire Middle East, to take control of a great portion of the
world's energy supplies, and to directly threaten America's friends
throughout the region, and subject the United States or any other
nation to nuclear blackmail.
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us. And there is
no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead him into
future confrontations with his neighbors -- confrontations that will
involve both the weapons he has today, and the ones he will continue
to develop with his oil wealth.
We are, after all, dealing with the same dictator who shoots at
American and British pilots in the no-fly zone on a regular basis; the
same dictator who dispatched a team of assassins to murder former
President Bush as he traveled abroad; the same dictator who invaded
Iran and Kuwait, and has fired ballistic missiles at Iran, Saudi
Arabia, and Israel; the same dictator who has been on the State
Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism for nearly two
decades.
In the face of such a threat, we must proceed with care, deliberation,
and in consultation with our allies. I know our President very well.
I've worked alongside him as he directed our response to the events of
last September 11th. I know that he will proceed cautiously and
deliberately to consider all possible options to deal with the threat
that Iraq, ruled by Saddam Hussein, represents. And I am confident
that he will, as he has said he would, consult widely with our
Congress, with our friends and allies around the world, before
deciding upon a course of action. He welcomes the debate that has been
joined here at home, and he has made it clear to his national security
team that he wants us to participate fully in the hearings that will
be held in Congress next month on this vitally important issue.
The elected leaders of the country have a responsibility to consider
all available options, and we are doing so. What we must not do in the
face of a mortal threat is give in to wishful thinking or to willful
blindness. We must not simply look away, hope for the best, and leave
the matter for some future administration to resolve. As President
Bush has said, time is not on our side. Deliverable weapons of mass
destruction in the hands of a terror network, or a murderous dictator,
or the two working together, constitutes as grave a threat as can be
imagined. The risks of inaction are far greater than the risk of
action.
Now and in the future, the United States will work closely with the
global coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the
materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of
mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile
defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. And the
entire world must know that we will take whatever action is necessary
to defend our freedom and our security.
As former Secretary of State Kissinger recently stated: "The imminence
of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the huge dangers it
involves, the rejection of a viable inspection system, and the
demonstrated hostility of Saddam Hussein combine to produce an
imperative for preemptive action." If the United States could have
preempted 9/11, we would have, no question. Should we be able to
prevent another, much more devastating attack, we will, no question.
This nation will not live at the mercy of terrorists or terror
regimes.
Some have argued that to oppose Saddam Hussein would cause even
greater troubles in that part of the world, and interfere with the
larger war against terror. I believe the opposite is true. Regime
change in Iraq would bring about a number of benefits to the entire
region. When the gravest of threats are eliminated, the freedom-loving
peoples of the region will have a chance to promote the values that
can bring lasting peace. As for the reaction of the Arab "street," the
Middle East expert, Professor Fouad Ajami, predicts that after
liberation, in Basra and Baghdad the streets are "sure to erupt in joy
in the same way the throngs in Kabul greeted the Americans."
Extremists in the region would have to rethink their strategy of
jihad. Moderates throughout the region would take heart. And our
ability to advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace process would be
enhanced, just as it was following the liberation of Kuwait in 1991.
The reality is that these times bring not only dangers but also
opportunities. In the Middle East, where so many have known only
poverty and oppression, terror and tyranny, we look to the day when
people can live in freedom and dignity, and the young can grow up free
of the conditions that breed despair, hatred, and violence.
In other times the world saw how the United States defeated fierce
enemies, then helped rebuild their countries, forming strong bonds
between our peoples and our governments. Today in Afghanistan, the
world is seeing that America acts not to conquer but to liberate, and
remains in friendship to help the people build a future of stability,
self-determination, and peace.
We would act in that same spirit after a regime change in Iraq. With
our help, a liberated Iraq can be a great nation once again. Iraq is
rich in natural resources and human talent, and has unlimited
potential for a peaceful and a prosperous future. Our goal would be an
Iraq that has territorial integrity, a government that is democratic
and pluralistic, a nation where the human rights of every ethnic and
religious group are recognized and respected. In that troubled land,
all who seek justice and dignity and the chance to live their own
lives can know they have a friend and ally in the United States of
America.
Great decisions and challenges lie ahead of us. Yet we can and will
build a safer and better world beyond the war on terror. I have shared
these thoughts with you today because war veterans with your
experience often have a superior perspective on matters involving the
nation's security. From experience you understand the overriding
importance of clear thinking, careful preparation, and above all
honesty, when we think about any future course of action. You
understand as well the purposes of this nation -- peace, freedom,
self-determination -- because you defended those very purposes in the
defining hours of your lives.
Once again, I am grateful for this chance to join you today. And on
behalf of the President and the nation, I thank you for your service
to the United States. Those who seek the true meaning of duty, honor,
service, and sacrifice, will find it in the Chosin Few.
Thank you very much.  (Applause.)
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list