猞猁部落

歡迎大家來真誠交流

首頁文章列表博文目錄

個人資料

猞猁

給我悄悄話

博客訪問：

再論薩達姆、WMDs和恐怖組織

(2009-05-16 02:56:03) 下一個

1992年,戈爾在演講中這樣說：

In pursuit of that objective, the Reagan-Bush administration would overlook the fact that it was an Iraq-based group that masterminded the assassination attempt against Israel's ambassador to the United Kingdom, which occurred in June of 1982. This event, of course, triggered Israel's invasion of Lebanon, not exactly a minor consequence for US policy. The Reagan-Bush administration was also prepared to overlook the fact that the terrorists who masterminded the attack on the Achille- Lauro and the savage murder of American Leon Klinghoffer, fled with Iraqi assistance. Nor did it seem to matter that the team of terrorists who set out to blow up the Rome airport came directly from Baghdad with suitcase bombs...

首先要說明一點, 美國對伊拉克WMD的指控並不是什麽“謊言”, 理由如下：

1.所謂謊言, 是指故意傳布自己不相信的信息。伊拉克擁有過WMD, 多次用過WMD, 在1991到1996年之間數次被迫承認自己瞞報了WMD。1998年跟聯合國檢查團終止合作之後, 受到聯合國決議的強烈譴責(如果大家都相信它已經沒有WMD, 那還查什麽?)。克林頓在講話裏稱它和國際恐怖組織組成了邪惡軸心(unholy axis), 對它把WMD交給恐怖組織的可能性深表憂慮("I say this not to frighten you")----是的, 小布什幾乎沒什麽新東西, 都是從克林頓一家照抄的, 連那句著名的“Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”也無非是緊跟希拉裏大嬸9月12日的講話精神而已----要相信這麽多人和組織長期堅持同一個慌言，那麽你多半是三鹿奶粉K多了。

2.到06年為止, 找到了大約500件化學武器。運載工具方麵的違規就更不必說了(伊政權向朝鮮求購的導彈射程達1300公裏)。

3.國會授權(H.J.Res.114)攻伊的理由大多數還是站得住腳的——

   1)薩達姆擁有發展WMD所需的知識、能力和意圖(請看Duelfer報告)。他賄賂法俄等大國以便瓦解經濟製裁, 戰前它的計劃已經接近成功, 此後就要大幹一場；
   2)它支持形形色色的國際恐怖主義組織(別扯薩達姆是什麽“世俗化的反恐鬥士”, 自己去看看國務院20年來的支恐國家名單, 還有1991年聯合國決議裏麵的恐怖主義相關條款）
   3)薩達姆破壞停火協定, 不但拒絕在監督之下銷毀WMD, 甚至頻繁向禁飛區的聯軍開火。
   4)老生常談的人權問題(UNSCR 688)。還有1998年的解放伊拉克法案。
   5)為了傷害董鼎山之流五毛憤老的感情。

薩達姆和恐怖主義

關於薩達姆資助的恐怖組織, 我們就先不說那些名字拗口的了, 就以哈馬斯為例, 你可以先看一則BBC的報道。

然後, 你如果退一步, 認定薩達姆是個“世俗性”的領導人, 因而他支持的恐怖組織也一定是“世俗化”的(即民族主義的組織, 以奪走以色列的國土為目標, 並不以推行伊斯蘭法為目標)、他絕不會跟原教旨主義團體有牽連——那麽, 請你先到國務院官網上查一下哈馬斯屬於“俗恐”還是“教恐”——或者再退一步, 我們就當哈馬斯本身不是原教旨主義組織好了(雖然Powell同誌在講話中另有意見), 那麽請問, 給它撐腰的是誰? 當然是那個“伊朗伊斯蘭共和國”, 現在的媒體都承認伊朗是哈馬斯主要的軍火供應者(有的人說是支國, 不過恐怕還是要伊朗作中間人)——你要是不相信當前的新聞報導, 我們可以看看國會情報分析部門多年前對哈馬斯的介紹(或者看1992年國務院反恐報告)。

回過頭來梳理一下, 哈馬斯長期受伊朗支持, 而薩達姆又對它公開資助, 如果你還要堅持認為薩達姆這樣的“世俗”政權不可能跟“原教旨”合作(即使它們暫時有共同的敵人和戰略目標), 似乎就說不過去了(這等於說敘利亞那個世俗性政權不可能跟德黑蘭的代理人真主黨合作)。當然你可以把“合作”的含義定得很窄, 下麵我再舉個例子, 或許有人認為哈馬斯被歸於恐怖組織不公平, 反而應該給它的領導人頒發那個炸藥和平獎, 我幹脆就以基地組織為例吧。

請看2000年CIA給國會的報告, 不要看伊拉克那個條目(因為報告主題是WMD, 而我們談的是恐怖主義, 而且還不能是“俗恐”, 必須是“教恐”, 否則單純拿出Abu Nidal組織或者胡狼卡洛斯就可以定論了), 請點擊蘇丹部分, 那裏提到該國化學武器的來源時是這麽說的：

Quote:

In the WMD arena, Sudan has been developing the capability to produce chemical weapons for many years. In this pursuit, it has obtained help from entities in other countries, principally Iraq. Given its history in developing chemical weapons and its close relationship with Iraq, Sudan may be interested in a BW program as well.

你再看1999年和1998年這些更早年份的同一報告, 都可以找到這一結論, 那麽伊拉克幫蘇丹發展化學武器這件事說明了什麽? 那就要請克林頓同學來回答。(在轟炸希法製藥廠之後)

Quote:

Our forces also attacked a factory in Sudan associated with the bin Ladin network. The factory was involved in the production of materials for chemical weapons.

本拉登和當時蘇丹政權的關係是公開的秘密, 況且蘇丹“議長”圖拉比(Hassan al-Turabi)當時也在大力推行伊斯蘭化, 那個政權本身就是很原教旨很暴力很威脅西方社會安全的一個東西。

Quote:

Additionally, the U.S. has reliable intelligence that the bin Ladin network has been actively seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction -- including chemical weapons -- for use against United States interests. Therefore, the U.S. also attacked one facility in Sudan associated with chemical weapons and the bin Ladin network. This facility is located within a secured chemical plant in the northeast Khartoum area. U.S. intelligence over the past few months has indicated that the bin Ladin network has been actively seeking to acquire chemical weapons for use against United States interests. Bin Ladin has extensive ties to the Sudanese Government and its industrial sector. The U.S. is confident this Sudanese Government-controlled facility is involved in the production of chemical weapons agents.

但是你會聽說中情局一直認為世俗化的薩政權和原教旨的本拉登是“天然敵人”, 很不可能“合作”——這就是我前麵說的, 他們在很窄的意義上使用“合作”這個詞, 也就是說, 隻有聯合參與一次具體的恐怖襲擊才叫“合作”, 而其它形式的幫助——如宣傳、資助、提供護照、支持其分支(例如Abu Sayyaf Group, 見ISGP-2003-00014100)、甚至給基地核心組織成員提供武器和軍事技能訓練。。。這些都不叫“合作”。

我不清楚為何中情局會采用這種表述方式, 但他們的措辭的確誤導了一大堆不學無術之徒。

要知道戰後從伊政權的內部文件中獲得了哪些信息, 最好看看USJFCOM的06年報告和07年的這部Iraqi Perspectives Project: Saddam and Terrorism, 主流媒體拿這個東西打擊布什, 結果是搬起石頭砸了自己的腳。(支國朋友上不去USJFCOM網站的話可以去Federation of American Scientists看這五卷報告)

前一部報告請主要看其PDF文檔的第71和72頁：

後一部就有多處可看了：

Quote:

Saddam's interest in, and support for, non-Iraqi non-state actors was spread across a wide variety of revolutionary, liberation, nationalist, and Islamic terrorist organizations. For years, Saddam maintained training camps for foreign "fighters" drawn from these Perse groups. In some cases, particularly for Palestinians, Saddam was also a strong financial supporter. Saddam supported groups that either associated directly with al Qaeda (such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri) or that generally shared al Qaeda's stated goals and objectives.

Quote:

Some aspects of the indirect cooperation between Saddam's regional terror enterprise and al Qaeda's more global one are somewhat analogous to the Cali and Medellin drug cartels. Both drug cartels (actually loose collections of families and criminal gangs) were serious national security concerns to the United States. Both cartels competed for a share of the illegal drug market. However, neither cartel was reluctant to cooperate with the other when it came to the pursuit of a common objective-expanding and facilitating their illicit trade. The wellpublicized and violent rise of the Medellin cartel temporarily obscured and overshadowed the rise of, and threat posed by, the Cali cartel. Recognizing Iraq as a second, or parallel, "terror cartel" that was simultaneously threatened by and somewhat aligned with its rival helps to explain the evidence emerging from the detritus of Saddam's regime. Based on captured recordings and documents, this paper illustrates in part how Saddam Hussein ran his "cartel."

Quote:

In the years between the two Gulf Wars, UN sanctions reduced Saddam's ability to shape regional and world events, steadily draining his military, economic, and military powers. The rise of Islamist fundamentalism in the region gave Saddam the opportunity to make terrorism, one of the few tools remaining in Saddam's "coercion" toolbox, not only cost effective but a formal instrument of state power. Saddam nurtured this capability with an infrastructure supporting (1)his own particular brand of state terrorism against internal and external threats, (2)the state sponsorship of suicide operations, and (3) organizational relationships and "outreach programs" for terrorist groups. Evidence that was uncovered and analyzed attests to the existence of a terrorist capability and a willingness to use it until the day Saddam was forced to flee Baghdad by Coalition forces.

最猛的是這一句：

Quote:

Captured documents reveal that the regime was willing to co-opt or support organisations it knew to be part of al- Qa'ida, as long as that organisation's near-term goals supported Saddam's longterm vision.

要是不想讀大部頭的東西, 可以回憶一下普京同誌04年訪問中亞時的重要講話。

順便說一下,白宮網站改版,布什的演講和視頻都刪掉了,這給查閱資料帶來了很大的不便;看來還是官僚機構好一些,CIA和國務院的曆史資料都在。

有些同學對於小布什的印象隻有那句著名的“Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”, 剛才說了, 這篇演講在白宮網站上已經沒了(順便說一句, 希拉裏大嬸的類似講話也沒了, 因為她已經不是參議員, 隻能到這裏看一下)。好在正如布什自己所說, 媒體跟官僚機構一樣永遠不會下台, 因此在CNN上還是能找到這句話的出處(見演講)。

希拉裏的這篇演說要去國會圖書館查閱, 請選擇Page: S9288, 最後一部分是Mrs. CLINTON的演講：

We will also stand united behind our President as he and his advisers plan the necessary actions to demonstrate America's resolve and commitment, not only to seek out an exact punishment on the perpetrators but to make very clear that not only those who harbor terrorists but those who in any way give any aid or comfort whatsoever will now face the wrath of our country. I hope that message has gotten through to everywhere it needs to be heard: You are either with America in our time of need or you are not.

(當然, John Kerry在1997年的一篇演講也值得一讀, 題目是We Must Be Firm With Saddam Hussein）

回到小布什的原話, 前言後語是這樣的：

And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.

02年的一次演說也可以作為參照：

I've said in the past that nations are either with us or against us in the war on terror. To be counted on the side of peace, nations must act. Every leader actually committed to peace will end incitement to violence in official media and publicly denounce homicide bombings. Every nation actually committed to peace will stop the flow of money, equipment and recruits to terrorist groups seeking the destruction of Israel, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah.

總之,“跟我們站在一邊”所指的無非是以下幾點：

“（政權領導人）必須命令官方媒體停止鼓吹暴力，並公開譴責自殺式炸彈襲擊,阻止資金和設備落入企圖毀滅以色列的恐怖組織——包括哈馬斯、伊斯蘭聖戰組織及真主黨等。”

薩達姆真的跟恐怖主義“毫不相幹”嗎? 對於蘆大仙來說, 誰敢質疑這一點就十惡不赦。國務院多年以來的Overview of State-Sponsored Terrorism名單如果不算數, 不知道始終高舉聯合國權威的蘆老人家有沒有讀過安理會決議的原話：

Deploring also that the Government of Iraq has failed to comply with its commitments pursuant to resolution 687 (1991) with regard to terrorism, pursuant to resolution 688 (1991) to end repression of its civilian population and to provide access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in Iraq, and pursuant to resolutions 686 (1991), 687 (1991), and 1284 (1999) to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals wrongfully detained by Iraq, or to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq...

(Patterns of Global Terrorism:1992)

前麵提到過克林頓總統在1998年關於unholy axis的重要講話, 下麵摘錄一段作本文的結束語：

In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity -- even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program.

有空也請到國防部網頁的FOIA閱覽室看看這個Summary of evidence(見下方圖1):前伊拉克軍人(Abbas Habid Rumi al Naely)成為塔利班分子、並且在1998年夥同IIS成員去炸美國駐巴基斯坦大使館(正是駐非洲使館遇襲的同一時期)。還有一件有意思的事：據美聯社09年的一則報道，在薩達姆那兒養老的15 May Organization領導人Abu Ibrahim已經重返戰場，國務院為之懸賞500萬美元。