* Iraq has the infrastructure [for a nuclear program]
* Iraq has the nuclear scientists with the know-how
* Iraq was "far, far closer to a crude nuclear device than anybody thought" after the 1st gulf war
* Specifically, maybe six months from a crude device
* There is uncertainty about how quickly Iraq could acquire nuclear weapons
Sorry, but these are all facts. Saddam DID have a nuclear weapons program at the time of the 1st gulf war, and to the surprise of inspectors he was in fact very, very close to building a 1st-generation bomb. That's why there was an ongoing international inspection regime thereafter.
Although the specific uranium enrichment plant was destroyed after the 1st gulf war, a lot of dual use equipment was kept around. Those nuclear scientists didn't go anywhere. And for reasons that to this day seem bizarre, given what played out, Iraq was playing "cat and mouse games" with the nuclear inspectors (quote from Hans Blix) and there was a great deal of uncertainty about the current status.
Those are facts. Google them yourself.
Did Iraq actually have weapons of mass destruction? No. Did the US and UK oversell the case for war? Yes. Did a great humanitarian tragedy happen as a result? Yes. But that didn't make Ms. Rice a lier when she said what specifically what was quoted above. We must pay careful attention to factual accuracy.
I believe he is on record for saying this, after he was captured. He was probably right, given that both Iran and Israel wanted to wipe him off the map. Iraq uber Saddam was a pariah state. But he underestimated the willingness of the US and UK to actually go to war.
I didn't say they weren't facts, I was just pointing out that if you have a quote and want to know it's correct, you just google it. Don't you agree with that?
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/01/10/wbr.smoking.gun/