I was on your side on that article, remember? I didn't give it any credibility either.

I agree that a lot depends on what they call "weapons programs." A study paper? Blueprints for a plant? Actual equipment that hasn't been used yet? (I still think those trailers fall into that category.) Hidden parts?

The issue would be further confused by "dual use" equipment, which has been one of Iraq's favorite techniques for concealing certain programs.

We know that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. We know he once had actual development programs, including hardware, for chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. We also know that much of this was located and destroyed after the first Gulf War, and since then as well.

What needs to be ascertained is what his plans were just before we attacked Iraq. Some people have said that Saddam destroyed all his programs on the sly. Some people say that the stuff is still there, but hidden. Even the anonymous source speculates as much in the first article you link. If there are no hidden weapons found, but lots of plans and stored equipment, then did Saddam hope to wait out the U.N. and then continue where he left off? It wouldn't have been the first time. Is Saddam a threat if he has programs waiting to be activated? Should we have waited until he was done before attacking? What other alternatives were there other than the threat of physical force?

What DID happen to all the weapons unaccounted for? Is it all just bad paperwork?

There is a lot of this that doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, from both the standpoint of our prewar intelligence assessment, but also from the point of those who claim there was never anything there at all. Neither side has a scenario that holds water on all levels.

I am really looking forward to seeing the preliminary report. One hopes that there is some hint of the investigative paths that they are still following.

A further article which IMO muddies the water even further, can be found here.