4 ms·
Otoh, wasn’t trusting human intel the reason the US claimed Iraq had WMD? (There are pitfalls to human intel too)
by edmundsauto 5y ago
Otoh, wasn’t trusting human intel the reason the US claimed Iraq had WMD? (There are pitfalls to human intel too)
- dredmorbius 5y agoMy understanding is that it was more a case of what the US administration wanted to hear and believe. The actual on-the-ground investigation was done by an at least nominally-independent UN team (UNSCOM). Scott Ritter specifically rejected WMD claims: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter The investigation lead by Hans Blix found some violations but AFAIR no indications of a significant WMD capability. The Wikipedia article has more information (I've skimmed it): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_des... I don't think this maps well to the Humint/Sigint division. Inspectors relied somewhat on both, though non-covert on-site visits played a large role. (Sigint and Humint are more typically covert.)