6th Anniversary

Cypress said:
The american intelligence community was more right than people give them credit for. And they certainly never advocated invasion, nor did they ever say Iraq was an imminent or immediate threat:

1) Saddam and Al Qaeda: American intel was RIGHT. They concluded pre-war that Saddam was unlikely to aid or assist Al Qaeda.

2) Post-war Iraq: American intel was RIGHT. They concluded chaos and sectarian violence could follow an american occupation. Bush blew off their warnings.

3) Nukes: American intel had a MIXED record. CIA concluded Saddam was reconstituting a nuclear program, but did not have actual nukes. Partially right. INR however, nailed it. They concluded the aluminum tubes were not for a nuke program, and there was no evidence for a nuke program. NAILED IT. In addition, IAEA reported pre-war there was no evidence of a nuke program.

3)Chem-Bio weapons. This is where american intel fell down. They were WRONG. They concluded, based on the circumstantial evidence of a few "defectors", and saddam's past history, that he had some mustard gas, sarin, etc. They qualified this by saying they had little beyond circumstantial evidence. And anyway, mustard gas and sarin are not really a strategic threat to the United States. They're only real use - under the right conditions - is as a tactical battlefield weapon.



See, I look at those conclusion in March of 2003, and conclude there's not enough evidence to conclude Saddam is an immediate threat, nor is it justification to invade. Bush concluded the opposite.
Click to expand...


This is pretty good stuff; no one ever talks this way about it anymore, even Hillary in last night's debate. It's always more along the lines of the intel being as wrong as it could be, telling us pretty much the opposite of what was happening...
 
It reminds me of Colin Powell's aide testifying that he was given a "Chinese menu" of possible intel, and basically asked to put Powell's case to the UN together with it...
 
Darla said:
or something. You know what the something is? An irrelevant, blowhard, who can't admit there is something in the world he didn't know about, or that he could be wrong about anything, and will spend days, weeks, even months, justifying his original jackass statement, which can never be justified, but that won't stop him, or God knows, shut him up.

I am going to be initiating a War On Old People, later today, and it is going to blow Tiana's war on cats and war on children clear out of the water, because brother, I mean business. This isn't going to be some willy-nilly "war". I am going to dust these guys.

For by wise counsel you shall make your war.
Click to expand...
HA HA HA, talk about a blowhard --Kettle/pot/black. Do your damnedest.
 
uscitizen said:
I am not so sure, you seem to be defending Bush on this issue.
I am confused by your attitude on this.
Click to expand...
certainly not. It is just one more of Bush's lies. He wants people to beleive that Ben Ladin is alive, as a fear-mongering ploy. I am quite certain that he knows Ben is dead. You may note that every time there is a serious threat, Ben Ladin appears. Thus we can't do anything because Ben might retaliate. The only way I support him in this is that it is a wise decision. but I sure don't think he came up with it.(but give the devil his due)
 
Damocles said:
One thing I find amusing is it was the same people who gave the intel for the WMD that were saying this. I guess even a broken watch is right twice a day.
Click to expand...
Frankly, (if I understand your point)I don't find many people sying what I am, and certainly not the ones who thought Saddam had the WMDs. ( but maybe I misunderstiid you)
 
Onceler said:
This is pretty good stuff; no one ever talks this way about it anymore, even Hillary in last night's debate. It's always more along the lines of the intel being as wrong as it could be, telling us pretty much the opposite of what was happening...
Click to expand...



Its too nuanced for an american politician to discuss. Its easier to blame the intel community.

And they did make mistakes. But, if one looked broadly at ALL their conclusions, I don't see how one comes to the conclusion that an invasion is neccessary.

Of course Bush and his fans kept telling us that Bush had "intell" that we couldn't see, because he couldn't share it publically.
 
doniston said:
Frankly, (if I understand your point)I don't find many people sying what I am, and certainly not the ones who thought Saddam had the WMDs. ( but maybe I misunderstiid you)
Click to expand...
I never thought Saddam had "WMD". First of all Sarin is a terrible "WMD", it takes way too much work and application to call it WMD. When the Japanese terrorists set some off in an enclosed space with thousands of people they killed very few and made some sick. It just can't be considered WMD, they'd have killed more just driving a car into a crowd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top