A timeline of the Iraq war


Good information, with a conservative bias.

Greyhawk has a timeline for the Iraq War, which he dates from 1990 to 2003.

I noticed a couple of sections.

October 1997: A protracted confrontation with Saddam Hussein begins after Iraq accuses U.S. members of the U.N. inspection teams of being spies and expels the majority of U.S. participants. The U.N. Security Council threatens renewed economic sanctions. The confrontation continues into November as Iraq expels the remaining six U.S. inspectors and the United Nations withdraws other inspectors in protest. Inspectors are readmitted after the United States and Great Britain again begin a military build-up in the Gulf. However, later in November, Iraq announces it will not allow inspectors access to sites designated as "palaces and official residences." U.N. officials protest, having long suspected that such sites were being used to conceal possible weapons of mass destruction.

1998: The tensions that began in October 1997 continue.

February 1, 1998: "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction." - US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Bill Clinton, February 4, 1998

February 11 1998: The US Navy is poised for strikes against Iraq:
ABOARD THE USS GEORGE WASHINGTON...

As the United States prepares for possible strikes against Iraq, Navy and Marine Corps pilots are set to fly the majority of missions in an operation code-named "Desert Thunder" that will hinge, by all accounts, on downpours of precision munitions...

At the center of any U.S. air assault on Iraq would be the F/A-18 and F-14 fighter jets on this aircraft carrier and another, the USS Independence, along with about 250 Tomahawk cruise missiles spread among eight other ships.

February 17, 1998: "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Bill Clinton

February 18, 1998: Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must, and will, stand firm. - Secretary of State US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright

February 18, 1998: "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser.

February 18, 1998: "If a soldier's life needs to be lost let it start with mine." - an un-named American GI expressing his support for President Clinton's policy on Iraq.

February 20-23, 1998: U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan visits Iraq in an effort secure inspections of what Iraq terms "presidential sites." The U.N. and Iraq agree to support the terms of the newly drafted "Memorandum of Understanding." The Memorandum secures UNSCOM access to eight previously off-limits presidential sites. Iraq receives promises the United Nations will consider removing its economic sanctions.

February 26 1998: The diplomatic solution is not universally well received, and critics of President Bill Clinton respond. The NY Times reports that Senator Trent Lott, (R-Ms) argues against the UN solution, and that he was not alone:
Many lawmakers Wednesday yearned for more than the administration's policy to contain Saddam.

"A democratic Iraq is certainly in our interest," Sen. Bob Kerrey, D-Neb., said in floor speech. "But it is above all for the sake of the Iraqis that we must replace Saddam."
But other Senators disagree:
"The president was in a tough spot, and this may be workable for him," said Rep. Dick Armey, R-Texas, the House majority leader.

Rep. Tillie Fowler, R-Fla., a Republican on the National Security Committee, said, "We need to learn more about the agreement, but let's give it an opportunity to work."

Rep. Constance Morella, R-Md., said, "We should proceed with caution and see if he keeps his word."

As Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the senior Democrat on the House National Security Committee, put it, "Saddam's feet will be held to the fire. We'll see if he complies. If not, we'll thump him."

<snip>

And this one.

Jan. 29, 2001: As the Bush administration settles in to the White House, the Washington Post opines:
...of all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerous -- or more urgent -- than the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf," including "intelligence photos that show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons."

Yes it has a conservative bias.

But considering how few progressive sources are willing to acknowledge the problems in Iraq before Mr. Bush was sworn in, I think I will keep this one handy.

— NeoWayland

Posted: Sat - November 19, 2005 at 10:29 PM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved