Faulty Intelligence?

Apparently not. You are revising history. It wasn't clear to you in late 2001 that Saddam didn't have WMDs. You had no way of knowing. The intelligence reports that Clinton had, that Gore had, that Bush had, the Kerry had, that the UN had, that the IAEA had, all said that he had them. And you certainly did not know more than they did, in spite of whatever opinion of your own knowledge you might have.

 

I thought it was true. I never really considered the possibility now expposed by the Inspector General's report; Bush siimply promoted any intelligence reports that tended to support the existence of WMD, and withheld or suppressed any that showed they no longer existed.

Now you may argue that we were foolish enough to believe what Bush was telling us. But that's not the issue, is it?

 

President Clinton led the way with the intelligence.

He stated that had he been president at the time, he would have invaded Iraq.

Saddam Hussein admitted that he wanted the WMD's just days before the invasion.

You thought it was true - so of course the president of the US led the invasion that you wanted.

Now you think that you can take it back just like you would to Walmart . . .

To late.

 

Yes, air strikes are an all out war on a sovereign nation . . .

At least that is what I think . . .

So has everyone since, 8 September 1941.

And as to your bad intelligence that led you and the other 80% of the Americans to support this war, I thought it was a mistake.

But, once the round is down range, you cannot put it back into the casing.

The rubicon was crossed. And we must fight the war that 80% of America voted for.

 

This issue is not whether or not we should continue fighting. The issue is whether or not Bush lied to us by withholding any intelligence that didn't fit his objectives.

And now the Pentagon's inspector general has revealed that he did.

He misled Americans and he misled Congress and our allies, many of whom are now angry and mistrustful of the United States. He's needlessly killed thousands of our troops and wasted untold billions of dollars on his personal vendetta against Saddam. His own intelligence people now say that his war has made the United States more vulnerable to terrorism. He's done grave damage to American security.

And you wonder why so many of those people who formerly supported him, now detest him?

 

What happened on September 8, 1941?

If you are talking about the attack on Pearl Harbor, it was December 7,1941.

 

Terry,

I am still waiting for you to say something intelligent, honest, and conservative a second time!

You would be close if you hadn't performed the mistake that this premise is guilty of: Truth often has multiple viewpoints - December 8th, 1941 was the day that they Japanese Attacked Pearl Harbor - December 7th, 1941 was the day that America was attacked.

Same event - two different points of view - accross a little thing called a date line.

:thumbs:

 

The Inspector General's report revealed no such thing.

But cling to that illusion if it makes you feel better.

 

We now know that saddam's leadership lied to him to keep him from killing him.

The American led blockade had prevented his people from carrying out his orders.

What I do not understnad is why American liberals would rather trust saddam and then lie to make the American President look like he is lying. Why not quit changing history and just go with the fact that saddam was the responsible party? Why not believe that he chose to lie to America knowing that he held the loosing hand?

He was stupid enough to attempt to assassinate an American President .. .

He was stupid enough to try to develop a nuclear program and artillery program so that he could nuke iran and israel . . .

 

Mistakes are not the same thing as lying.

And when your intelligence is based upon trusting people like plame and her husband that divulge classified information for political gain, and saddam lying to the press, and saddam's generals encouraging the USA to dispose their despot - you are gonna make mistakes.

And conspiracy theorists are gonna have a field day . . . because their fear of the truth is greater than their fear of telling a lie.

 

Did I really right that?

:laugh:

 

And so . . . you knowing what we all know - the faulty intelligence came from the enemy blame the President of the USA . . .

Personally, if I knew the enemy was the culprit, I wouldn't even blame you much less the President of the USA.

Guess we have differing standards of guilt and integrity.

 

Exhibit A.
Downing Street memos.

Exhibit B.

SOURCE

Exhibit C.

Saddam Hussein "is just the immediate justification for a wider role in middle eastern affairs". PNAC. Rebuilding America's Defenses. Page 14.

Exhibit D. Flashback to 1962.

Exhibit E. Flasback to Iran 1953.

In case you don't understand what happened in Iran in 1953. To make a long story short, our "leaders" used a false flag terror campaign to overthrow the Iranian government because Iran wanted to control it's own resources. How dare they?

Then there is the neocon's "Strausian philosophy".

The intell was fixed and we were going to go to war even if Bush and Blair had to use a false flag op to start it. Wouldn't be the first time deception and false flags were used to take America to war and/or overthrow another government.

 

So the evidence was good enough to bomb a little but not a lot?

But that's not really the point, now, is it? As I pointed out, the issue is that the "faulty intelligence" was believed by more than Bush. It was believed by those who came before him, and by those in other nations.

Don't confuse things.

It is not presumptuous at all, when you change the topic that i addressed. The topic I addressed was that the intelligence Bush used was the same intelligence that Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and others all agreed on. It may have been faulty, but it was believed by many more than Bush who saw it.

So? That's not the point I was addressing. If you are going to address me, then address the point I made. It is a little presumptous for you to lecture me on the point I made, while ignoring it.

Great. Now try paying attention to the thread.

... Seriously, I have been a little smart aleck just having some fun here. But please pay attention to what I said. I was not talking about the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection. I was talking about the reports of the existence of WMDs. They were believed by all.