A New York Times report on aging chemical munitions found during the Iraq war proves that President George W. Bush was correct in asserting that then-Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had not dismantled his illegal arsenal, two security experts told
Newsmax TV on Wednesday.
"This was not a new story," J. Michael Waller, of the private intelligence firm Oceanic Advisors, told "MidPoint" host Ed Berliner. "We knew these things were being found — it was the mainstream media that was not reporting."
Story continues below video.
Note: Watch Newsmax TV now on DIRECTV Ch. 349 and DISH Ch. 223
Get Newsmax TV on your cable system – Click Here Now
What the Pentagon concealed, according to the
Times, was that U.S. troops were exposed to weaponized toxins — mustard gas and sarin — while handling several thousand chemically armed, decomposing rockets left over from Iraq's 1980-88 war against Iran.
"To me, it's very surprising that the Pentagon would hush up this information," said Jim Phillips, a Heritage Foundation senior Mideast researcher, "because it does support the Bush administration's argument."
The case for invading Iraq after 9/11 was made in part on assertions that Hussein hid active nuclear and chemical weapons programs after 1991, in defiance of signed agreements after the Persian Gulf War — in which Iraq was driven from Kuwait — and U.N. Security Council resolutions.
The Times article describes the previously undisclosed chemical weapons as "abandoned" by the Hussein regime.
"Because the chemical weapons found were not later than 1991 [in manufacture], it did not fully prove the Bush administration's claim that Iraq had never stopped building the weapons," said Phillips, "but nevertheless, it would've been a great victory for U.S foreign policy, and it's really puzzling why they would cover that up."
Phillips and Waller also discussed the prospect of a
U.S.-Russia alliance against the Islamic State (ISIS). Both said the arrangement, which will reportedly include intelligence-sharing, could ultimately boost Russia at U.S. expense.
"This is a very risky idea," said Phillips. "The Russians may have some anecdotal evidence or intelligence information that we don't already have, but I would greatly distrust what they pass along because in the end, they're playing with different goals."
"If we had an administration that we had faith in, this would be a worthwhile thing to explore because we could exploit Russian assets to our own advantage," said Waller.
"Unfortunately, [Secretary of State John] Kerry and others don't inspire that kind of confidence to work with the Russians effectively.
"They're going to be using us," said Waller,"and it's in the Russian interest to make sure we have a strategic defeat in the Middle East."