Originally posted by: Gaard
I won't presume to know how to fix it. But I do know who broke it.
Cliffnotes:
The Clinton Administration's Public Case Against Saddam Hussein
"The [Bush] Administration did not hesitate to heighten and distort public
fear of terrorism after September 11th, to create a political case for
attacking Iraq."
-- Former Vice President Al Gore, February 5, 2004
The Clinton Administration's Public Case Against Saddam Hussein
In June of 1997, Iraq officials had ratcheted up their obstruction of
UNSCOM inspection efforts. They interfered with UNSCOM air operations and
denied and delayed access of inspectors to sites. In September, they
burned documents at sites while inspectors watched outside the front
entrance. By mid-November, Saddam Hussein had demanded an end to U-2
surveillance flights over Iraq and called on American inspectors to leave
Iraq.1 Iraqis also began moving equipment that could produce weapons of
mass destruction out of the range of video cameras inspectors had
installed inside key industrial facilities.2
At first, the Clinton administration adopted a generally reserved tone
toward Saddam's provocations. "We believe that he needs to fulfill all the
Security Council obligations and that that is an appropriate way to deal
with him," commented Secretary Albright at a November 5 press conference
with the German foreign minister.3
The next day Secretary Cohen held a ceremony unrelated to Iraq, but,
citing "an unusual array" of journalists present, he also spoke on Iraq.
"It's imperative that Iraq comply with U.N. mandates," said Cohen, but
"the task right now, however, is to persuade them to cease and desist from
their obstruction." And when asked what would be the consequences should
Saddam not comply, Cohen said simply, "it's important that we not
speculate what those reactions might be."4
Striking a similar tone on November 10 at the Pentagon, Vice President
Gore stated that "Saddam has taken steps that interfere with the ability
of the inspection team to carry out its mission." He added, "The procedure
chosen to deal with this situation is to engage him in discussions in
which he can be made aware that this is not a smart thing for him to do,
and he ought to change his mind."5
But Saddam remained defiant. So on Friday, November 14, President Clinton
and his top advisors met at the White House and decided to launch a public
campaign to build support for a possible war against Iraq.
"Prepare the Country for War"
The New York Times reported that at the November 14 meeting the "White
House decided to prepare the country for war." According to the Times,
"[t]he decision was made to begin a public campaign through interviews on
the Sunday morning television news programs to inform the American people
of the dangers of biological warfare."6 During this time, the Washington
Post reported that President Clinton specifically directed Cohen "to raise
the profile of the biological and chemical threat."7
On November 16, Cohen made a widely reported appearance on ABC's This Week
in which he placed a five-pound bag of sugar on the table and stated that
that amount of anthrax "would destroy at least half the population" of
Washington, D.C. Cohen explained how fast a person could die once exposed
to anthrax. "One of the things we found with anthrax is that one breath
and you are likely to face death within five days. One small particle of
anthrax would produce death within five days." And he noted that Iraq "has
had enormous amounts" of anthrax. Cohen also spoke on the extreme
lethality of VX nerve agent: "One drop [of VX] from this particular
thimble as such -- one single drop will kill you within a few minutes."
And he reminded the world that Saddam may have enough VX to kill
"millions, millions, if it were properly dispersed and through aerosol
mechanisms."8
"The War of Words Grows; U.S.: Poisons Are World Threat" headlined the New
York Daily News Monday morning.9 CBS News said the White House had begun
"a new tack, warning in the darkest possible terms of the damage which
Saddam Hussein could inflict with his chemical and biological weapons."10
And in "America the Vulnerable; A disaster is just waiting to happen if
Iraq unleashes its poison and germs," Time wrote that "officials in
Washington are deeply worried about what some of them call 'strategic
crime.' By that they mean the merging of the output from a government's
arsenals, like Saddam's biological weapons, with a group of
semi-independent terrorists, like radical Islamist groups, who might slip
such bioweapons into the U.S. and use them."11
This message was echoed in a series of remarks President Clinton delivered
the same week.
"I say this not to frighten you"
In Sacramento, November 15, Clinton painted a bleak future if nations did
not cooperate against "organized forces of destruction," telling the
audience that only a small amount of "nuclear cake put in a bomb would do
ten times as much damage as the Oklahoma City bomb did." Effectively
dealing with proliferation and not letting weapons "fall into the wrong
hands" is "fundamentally what is stake in the stand off we're having in
Iraq today."
He asked Americans to not to view the current crisis as a "replay" of the
Gulf War in 1991. Instead, "think about it in terms of the innocent
Japanese people that died in the subway when the sarin gas was released
[by the religious cult Aum Shinrikyo in 1995]; and how important it is for
every responsible government in the world to do everything that can
possibly be done not to let big stores of chemical or biological weapons
fall into the wrong hands, not to let irresponsible people develop the
capacity to put them in warheads on missiles or put them in briefcases
that could be exploded in small rooms. And I say this not to frighten
you."12
Again in Wichita, November 17, Clinton said that what happens in Iraq
"matters to you, to your children and to the future, because this is a
challenge we must face not just in Iraq but throughout the world. We must
not allow the 21st century to go forward under a cloud of fear that
terrorists, organized criminals, drug traffickers will terrorize people
with chemical and biological weapons the way the nuclear threat hung over
the heads of the whole world through the last half of this century. That
is what is at issue."13
On November 19, at a White House signing ceremony for an adoption bill,
Clinton warned that Iraq must "let the weapons inspectors resume their
work to prevent Iraq from developing an arsenal of nuclear, chemical, and
biological weapons." To achieve this, "we are prepared to pursue whatever
options are necessary" because, Clinton added, "I do not want these
children we are trying to put in stable homes to grow up into a world
where they are threatened by terrorists with biological and chemical
weapons."14
In Washington, D.C., November 21, Clinton applauded the return of UNSCOM
inspectors that day (after a three week absence) "to proceed with their
work without interference, to find, to destroy, to prevent Iraq from
rebuilding nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to
carry them." He added: "We must not let our children be exposed to the
indiscriminate availability and potential abuse and actual use of the
biological and chemical and smaller-scale nuclear weapons which could
terrorize the 21st century," said Clinton.15
But with the return of the UNSCOM, Iraqi officials began delaying entry of
inspectors to "sensitive sites."16
"Clear and Present Danger"
On November 25, the Pentagon released "Proliferation: Threat and
Response." A few things stand out in the report. In the section on Iraq,
the word "terrorism" (in any form) is not mentioned. It is, though, cited
in the sections on Libya and Iran. The report stated that Iraq "probably
has hidden" chemical munitions, "may retain ? some missile warheads" from
its old biological program, and could jump-start production of chemical
and biological weapons "should UN sanctions and monitoring end or be
substantially reduced."17
Cohen began his press briefing on the Pentagon report by showing a picture
of a Kurdish mother and her child who had been gassed by Saddam's army. A
bit later, standing besides the gruesome image, he described death on a
mass scale. "One drop [of VX nerve agent] on your finger will produce
death in a matter of just a few moments. Now the UN believes that Saddam
may have produced as much as 200 tons of VX, and this would, of course, be
theoretically enough to kill every man, woman and child on the face of the
earth." He then sketched an image of a massive chemical attack on an
American city. Recalling Saddam's use of poison gas and the sarin attack
in Tokyo, Cohen warned that "we face a clear and present danger today" and
reminded people that the "terrorist who bombed the World Trade Center in
New York had in mind the destruction and deaths of some 250,000 people
that they were determined to kill."
Asked whether Iraq had moved "any of his programs underground into these
hardened facilities," Cohen responded that he didn't know whether Saddam
had "moved these chemicals or biological agents and materials --- not only
the agents themselves, but documentation .... So we don't know whether
they've moved them into hardened shelters or underground bunkers." He
spoke of Iraqi weapons as fact, not a probability or likelihood.18
By mid-December, the Pentagon had announced that all members of the
military would be vaccinated against anthrax with the first vaccinations
going to those "assigned or deployed to the high threat areas of Southwest
Asia and Northeast Asia."19 At the same, time, Iraqi officials announced a
ban on inspections of "presidential sites" and restricted access to other
"sensitive sites." With the start of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan
approaching on December 31, the administration decided that any military
strike had to wait. "Dragging things out to get past Ramadan" is how a
senior Clinton official characterized administration policy during this
period to the Washington Post.20
1998
With the end of Ramadan on January 29 and Saddam still failing to comply
with his commitment to the U.N. to disarm, Clinton officials resumed
public efforts to make the case on the threat posed by Saddam Hussein.
Secretary Albright flew to the Middle East to drum up support for possible
war.21 "Saddam Hussein, armed with chemical and biological weapons, is a
threat to the international community," she told journalists in Bahrain.22
A few days later, on February 7, Clinton, joined by Prime Minister Blair,
devoted his Saturday radio address to Iraq. Noting the two were speaking
from the same room where FDR and Churchill "charted our path victory in
World War II," Clinton told Americans that we now face "a new nexus of
threats, none more dangerous than chemical and biological weapons, and the
terrorists, criminals and outlaw states that seek to acquire them." He
warned that "Iraq continues to conceal chemical and biological weapon
,"
"has the "missiles that can deliver them" and "has the capacity to quickly
restart production of these weapons."23
How fast Saddam could "restart production" was discussed in a 10-page U.S.
Government white paper on "Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction" released on
February 13.24 "In the absence of UNSCOM inspectors," the report stated,
"Iraq could restart limited mustard agent production with[in] a few weeks,
full-production of sarin within a few months, and pre-Gulf war production
levels - including VX - within two or three years." It had a chart listing
how many were killed by Saddam's chemical weapons in the 1980s. It noted
that although inspections severely curtailed Iraq's wmd programs, Saddam
"is actively trying to retain what remains of his wmd programs while
wearing down the will of the Security Council to maintain sanctions." But,
"even a small residual force of operational missiles armed with biological
or chemical warheads would pose a serious threat to neighboring countries
and US military forces in the region."25
It detailed the biological and chemical agents and munitions for which
Iraq had not accounted. It stated that Iraq "provided no hard evidence to
support claims that it destroyed all of its BW agents and munitions in
1991" and "has not supplied adequate evidence to support its claim that it
destroyed all of its CW agents and munitions."26
The white paper also discussed Iraqi nuclear activity.
Under the White Paper's "nuclear weapons" section, it observed: "Baghdad's
interest in acquiring nuclear or developing nuclear weapons has not
diminished"; "we have concerns that scientists may be pursuing theoretical
nuclear research that would reduce the time required to produce a weapon
should Iraq acquire sufficient fissile material"; "Iraq continues to
withhold significant information about enrichment techniques, foreign
procurement, weapons design, and the role of Iraq's security and
intelligence services in obtaining external assistance and coordinating
postwar concealment."27
On February 17, President Clinton spoke on the steps of the Pentagon. The
president declared that the great danger confronting the U.S. and its
allies was the "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." Before the Gulf War of 1991, he noted, "Saddam had built up a
terrible arsenal, and he had used it. Not once, but many times in a
decade-long war with Iran, he used chemical weapons against combatants,
against civilians, against a foreign adversary and even against his own
people."28
Clinton furthered explained that:
Iraq "admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare
capability, notably, 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism;
2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157
aerial bombs. And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has
actually greatly understated its production. . . .
"Over the past few months, as [the weapons inspectors] have come closer
and closer to rooting out Iraq's remaining nuclear capacity, Saddam has
undertaken yet another gambit to thwart their ambitions by imposing
debilitating conditions on the inspectors and declaring key sites which
have still not been inspected off limits . . . .
"It is obvious that there is an attempt here, based on the whole history
of this operation since 1991, to protect whatever remains of his
capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction, the missiles to deliver
them, and the feed stocks necessary to produce them. The UNSCOM
inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and
biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the
capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many
more weapons. . . .
"Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail
to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more
opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and
continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to
ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that
the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude
that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating
destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the
arsenal. . . . 29
"Madonna and Child Saddam Hussein-style"
On February 18, Secretaries Cohen and Albright and National Security
Advisor Berger held a global town hall meeting on the campus of Ohio State
University. They noted that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass
destruction and had used them.
"Saddam Hussein," Cohen said "has developed an arsenal of deadly chemical
and biological weapons. He has used these weapons repeatedly against his
own people as well as Iran. I have a picture which I believe CNN can show
on its cameras, but here's a picture taken of an Iraqi mother and child
killed by Iraqi nerve gas. This is what I would call Madonna and child
Saddam Hussein-style."
Berger declared that "in the 21st century, the community of nations may
see more and more of this very kind of threat that Iraq poses now, a rogue
state with biological and chemical weapons."
The "record will show that Saddam Hussein has produced weapons of mass
destruction," Albright stated, "which he's clearly not collecting for his
own personal pleasure, but in order to use." She continued: "Iraq is a
long way from [here], 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."30
"If the world had been firmer with Hitler"
At Tennessee State on February 19, Albright told the crowd that the world
has not "seen, except maybe since Hitler, somebody who is quite as evil as
Saddam Hussein." In answering a question, she sketched some of the "worse"
case scenarios should Saddam "break out of the box that we kept him in."
One "scenario is that he could in fact somehow use his weapons of mass
destruction."
"Another scenario is that he could kind of become the salesman for weapons
of mass destruction -- that he could be the place that people come and get
more weapons."
One of the lessons of history, Albright continued, is that "if you don't
stop a horrific dictator before he gets started too far -- that he can do
untold damage." "If the world had been firmer with Hitler earlier," said
Albright, "then chances are that we might not have needed to send
Americans to Europe during the Second World War."31
Four days later, February 23, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan reached a
deal with Saddam for inspections of presidential sites. The Security
Council endorsed the agreement on March 2 with UNSC Resolution 1154, which
warned of the "severest consequences" should Iraq break the agreement. But
within a few months, Saddam was again obstructing U.N. inspectors.
On May 22, 1998, President Clinton delivered a speech reminiscent of the
comments he made on February 17 at the Pentagon.
The president warned Annapolis graduates that our enemies "may deploy
compact and relatively cheap weapons of mass destruction - not just
nuclear, but also chemical or biological, to use disease as a weapon of
war. Sometimes the terrorists and criminals act alone. But increasingly,
they are interconnected, and sometimes supported by hostile countries."
The U.S. will work to "prevent the spread and use of biological weapons
and to protect our people in the event these terrible weapons are ever
unleashed by a rogue state or terrorist group or an international criminal
organization." This protection will include "creating stockpiles of
medicines and vaccines to protect our civilian population against the kind
of biological agents our adversaries are most likely to obtain or
develop."32
On August 5, 1998, Iraq halted no-notice inspections by UNSCOM but allowed
UNSCOM's monitoring activities to continue.33
On August 14, 1998, President Clinton signed public law 105-235, "Iraqi
Breach of International Obligations," which had passed the Senate
unanimously and by a vote of 407-6 in the House.34 Among the law's
findings: "Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threaten
vital United States interests and international peace and security." It
concluded:
"Resolved ... [t]hat the Government of Iraq is in material and
unacceptable breach of its international obligations, and therefore the
President is urged to take appropriate action, in accordance with the
Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into
compliance with its international obligations."35
Six days later, August 20, the U.S. launched missiles strikes in
Afghanistan and Sudan. According to the September 1, 1998 Washington Post,
a U.S. intelligence operation "to investigate Sudan's nascent chemical
weapons program ultimately linked Al Shifa [a Sudanese pharmaceutical
factory] to Iraq's chemical weapons programs...."36
Regime Change
On October 31, 1998, Iraq ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM.37 The same
day President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act, which declared that
"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to
remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to
promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that
regime."38 In signing the Act, the President stated that the U.S. "looks
forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter
into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal
international life."39
Two week later, November 14, Iraq resumed cooperation with UNSCOM,
averting U.S and British air strikes.40
On December 8, National Security Advisor Berger delivered an address at
Stanford University on U.S. policy on Iraq. He stated:
"As long as Saddam remains in power and in confrontation with the world,
the positive evolution we and so many would like to see in the Middle
East is less likely to occur. His Iraq remains a source of potential
conflict in the region, a source of inspiration for those who equate
violence with power and compromise with surrender, a source of
uncertainty for those who would like to see a stable region in which to
invest.
"Change inside Iraq is necessary not least because it would help free
the Middle East from its preoccupation with security and struggle and
survival, and make it easier for its people to focus their energies on
commerce and cooperation.
"For the last eight years, American policy toward Iraq has been based on
the tangible threat Saddam poses to our security. That threat is clear.
Saddam's history of aggression, and his recent record of deception and
defiance, leave no doubt that he would resume his drive for regional
domination if he had the chance. Year after year, in conflict after
conflict, Saddam has proven that he seeks weapons, including weapons of
mass destruction, in order to use them."
"We will continue to contain the threat Iraq poses to its region and the
world. But for all the reasons I have mentioned, President Clinton has
said that over the long-term, the best way to address the challenge Iraq
poses is 'through a government in Baghdad - a new government - that is
committed to represent and respect its people, not repress them; that is
committed to peace in the region.' Our policy toward Iraq today is to
contain Saddam, but also to oppose him."41
On December 9, Iraq again resumed obstructing inspection activities and
shortly thereafter UNSCOM withdrew inspectors from Iraq.42
Desert Fox and a "threat of the future"
On December 16, 1998, President Clinton launched Operation Desert Fox, a
four-day missile and bombing attack on Iraq. "I acted quickly because, as
my military advisors stressed, the longer we waited, the more time Saddam
would have to disburse his forces and protect his arsenal," Clinton
explained in his December 19 radio address to the nation. "Our mission is
clear: to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass
destruction."43 (It should be noted that on July 27, 2003 President
Clinton assessed the effectiveness of Desert Fox. He stated: "When I left
office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material
unaccounted for. That is, at the end of the first Gulf War, we knew what
he had. We knew what was destroyed in all the inspection processes and
that was a lot. And then we bombed with the British for four days in 1998.
We might have gotten it all; we might have gotten half of it; we might
have gotten none of it. But we didn't know." )44
Secretary Albright held a briefing on Desert Fox and was asked how she
would respond to those who say that unlike the 1991 Gulf War this campaign
"looks like mostly an Anglo-American mission." She answered:
"We are now dealing with a threat, I think, that is probably harder for
some to understand because it is a threat of the future, rather than a
present threat, or a present act such as a border crossing, a border
aggression. And here, as the president described in his statement
yesterday, we are concerned about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's
ability to have, develop, deploy weapons of mass destruction and the
threat that that poses to the neighbors, to the stability of the Middle
East, and therefore, ultimately to ourselves.45
Secretary Cohen replied much the same way to comments made in March of
1998 by Senator Campbell of Colorado, who chided the administration for
not keeping the "coalition together" during an Appropriations Committee
hearing. Cohen responded:
And that's one of the reasons why you haven't seen the kind of
solidarity that we had before; much harder when the case is the threat
of weapons of mass destruction versus Saddam Hussein setting off 600 oil
wells in the field of Kuwait and seeing that kind of threat, which is
real and tangible, as opposed to one which might take place some time in
the future, as far as the use of his chemical and biologicals.46
On December 19, Saddam Hussein declared that inspectors would never be
allowed back in Iraq.47 Inspectors wouldn't return to Iraq for five years.
------------------------------------
Department of State "Timeline of UN-Iraq Coalition Incidents,
1991-2002," published February 20, 2004 available at
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/iraq/timeline.htm.
John M. Goshko, "Iraqis May Be Acting to Avoid Surveillance," Washington
Post, November 6, 1997.
Remarks by Secretary Albright at press conference with German Foreign
Minister Kinkel, U.S. State Department, November 5, 1997.
Remarks by Defense Secretary Cohen during award ceremony for the
Seasparrow missile system at the Pentagon, November 6, 1997.
Remarks by Vice President Gore at Pentagon procurement reform news
briefing, November 10, 1997.
Elaine Sciolino, "How Tough Questions and Shrewd Mediating Brought Iraqi
Showdown to an End," New York Times, November 23, 1997.
Barton Gellman; Dana Priest; Bradley Graham, "Diplomacy and Doubts on
the Road to War," Washington Post, March 1, 1998.
ABC News, This Week, November 16, 1997.
Daily News (New York), "The War of Words Grows, U.S.: Poisons are World
Threat," November 17, 1997.
CBS Morning News transcript, November 17, 1997.
Bruce W. Nelan, Reported by Edward Barnes/New York, Elain Shannon and
Mark Thompson/Washington, "America the Vulnerable," Time, November 24,
1997.
Remarks by President Clinton at a Democratic National Committee event,
Sacramento Capital Club, Sacramento, CA, November 15, 1997.
Remarks by President Clinton, Cessna Training Facility, Wichita, KS,
November 17, 1997.
Remarks by President Clinton at signing of Adoption and Safe Families
Act of 1997, White House, November 19, 1997.
Remarks by President Clinton at the Rabin-Peres Peace Foundation Award
ceremony, Washington, D.C., November 21, 1997.
Department of State "Timeline of UN-Iraq Coalition Incidents,
1991-2002," published February 20, 2004.
Department of Defense, "Proliferation: Threat and Response-November
1997," released November 25, 1997, available at
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/prolif97/.
Remarks by Defense Secretary Cohen during a Defense Department Briefing,
November 25, 1997, available at
http://www.defenselink.mil/new...11251997_t1125ptr.html.
Department of Defense Press Release, "Defense Department To Start
Immunizing Troops Against Anthrax, December 15, 1997, available at
http://www.defenselink.mil/new...12151997_bt679-97.html.
Senior Clinton Administration Official, quoted in Barton Gellman, Dana
Priest, Bradley Graham, "Diplomacy and Doubts on the Road to War,"
Washington Post, March 1, 1998.
Anwar Faruqi, "Albright Faces Tough Mission in Gulf with Iraq,"
Associated Press, February 1, 1998.
Remarks by Secretary Albright, Manama, Bahrain, February 3, 1998.
President Clinton's Weekly Radio Address, White House, February 7, 1998.
U.S. Government White Paper, "Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
Programs," released by U.S. Department of State on February 13, 1998
available at http://www.state.gov/www/regio.../iraq_white_paper.html.
U.S. Government White Paper, "Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
Programs," released by U.S. Department of State on February 13, 1998.
U.S. Government White Paper, "Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
Programs," released by U.S. Department of State on February 13, 1998. It
should be noted that the CIA's "Report of Proliferation-Related
Acquisition in 1997," released in July of 1998 (available at
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports..._reports/acq1997.html), made no
mention of nuclear activity in the three paragraphs devoted to Iraq, but
the report did discuss, at length, Iran's nuclear activity; and the
CIA's June, 1997-released report on wmd-related acquisition devoted one
line to Iraq with no mention of Iraqi nuclear activity.
U.S. Government White Paper, "Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
Programs," released by U.S. Department of State on February 13, 1998.
Remarks by President Clinton at the Pentagon, February 17, 1998.
Remarks by President Clinton at the Pentagon, February 17, 1998.
Remarks by Secretaries Cohen and Albright and National Security Advisor
Sandy Berger at a Town Hall meeting on the campus of Ohio State
University in Columbus, Ohio, February 18, 1998.
Remarks by Secretary Albright at Tennessee State University, February
20, 1998.
Remarks by President Clinton, U.S. Naval Academy commencement address,
May 22, 1998.
Department of State "Timeline of UN-Iraq Coalition Incidents,
1991-2002," published February 20, 2004.
Senate vote on S.J. Resolution 54 on July 31, 1998; House roll call vote
number 378, August 3, 1998.
Public Law 105-235, "A Joint Resolution Finding the Government of Iraq
in Unacceptable and Material Breach of its International Obligations,"
available at
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SJ00054:|TOM:/bss/d105query.html.
Vernon Loeb and Bradley Graham, "Sudan Plant Probed Months Before
Attack," Washington Post, September 1, 1998.
Department of State "Timeline of UN-Iraq Coalition Incidents,
1991-2002," published February 20, 2004.
Public law 105-338, "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998," October 31, 1998,
available at
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HR04655:|TOM:/bss/d105query.html.
White House press release, "Clinton Signs Iraq Liberation Act," October
31, 1998, http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/11/01/981101-in.htm.
Department of State "Timeline of UN-Iraq Coalition Incidents,
1991-2002," published February 20, 2004.
Address by National Security Advisor Berger, Stanford University,
December 8, 1998.
Department of State "Timeline of UN-Iraq Coalition Incidents,
1991-2002," published February 20, 2004.
Remarks by President Clinton during his Weekly Radio Address, December
19, 1998.
Remarks by President Clinton on CNN's Larry King Live, July 27, 2003.
Remarks by Secretary Albright during special briefing on Operation
Desert Fox at the U.S. State Department, December 17, 1998.
Remarks of Secretary Cohen before the Senate Appropriations Committee,
March 6, 1998.
Department of State "Timeline of UN-Iraq Coalition Incidents,
1991-2002," published February 20, 2004.
So much for one administration trying to carry out the work that another administration started. People are so damn finicky..