Evidence was lacking for both, despite claims by President Bush and others, Thielmann said in an interview this week. Suspicions were presented as fact, contrary arguments ignored, he said.
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
I'm not surprised. I feel pretty silly for believing them when they said Iraq had WMD back in January. With each day that passes, we find the news to be quite the opposite. I think their should be an investigation on this. A lot of families who lost and continue to lose family members each day are probably feeling betrayed right now. I'm willing to be that the morale is low in Iraq for our brave servicemen and women. Imagine yourself in a country with total anarchy. You have no business even being there. Their are no WMD and you are being attacked everyday. Driving around cities trying to prevent looting and violence. Who knows if someone in that crowd has a grenade ready to toss it your way or that person at a checkpoint is going to blow himself up. What Bush did was shameful.
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
I'm not surprised. I feel pretty silly for believing them when they said Iraq had WMD back in January. With each day that passes, we find the news to be quite the opposite. I think their should be an investigation on this. A lot of families who lost and continue to lose family members each day are probably feeling betrayed right now. I'm willing to be that the morale is low in Iraq for our brave servicemen and women. Imagine yourself in a country with total anarchy. You have no business even being there. Their are no WMD and you are being attacked everyday. Driving around cities trying to prevent looting and violence. Who knows if someone in that crowd has a grenade ready to toss it your way or that person at a checkpoint is going to blow himself up. What Bush did was shameful.
Yeah that's kind of how I feel, I had moderate support for the war on the assumption the leaders of the US had access to information that the rest of us didn't. I feel like I've been tricked or something.
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration distorted intelligence and presented conjecture as evidence to justify a U.S. invasion of Iraq, according to a retired intelligence official who served during the months before the war.
"What disturbs me deeply is what I think are the disingenuous statements made from the very top about what the intelligence did say," said Greg Thielmann, who retired last September. "The area of distortion was greatest in the nuclear field."
Thielmann was director of the strategic, proliferation and military issues office in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research. His office was privy to classified intelligence gathered by the CIA and other agencies about Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear programs.
[ ... ]
It would almost shock me if they found a real link between senior members of Saddam's Baath Party and Al Qaeda. Because every intelligence agency, including the CIA, in the world already disproved any reputed links that came up in the past. Idiologically, they just don't see things eye to eye.Originally posted by: laFiera
so what's new???
i remember a month ago or so people posting, "in due time the evidence of these weapons will come out"; looks like time is going and only the opposite is showing up---no WMD's to be found. If i remember correctly, the war was sold on this premise---imminent threat of these WMD's; of course, it wouldn't surprised me now if they find some type of evidence linking saddam to 9/11; something must justify the war.
Originally posted by: manly
It would almost shock me if they found a real link between senior members of Saddam's Baath Party and Al Qaeda. Because every intelligence agency, including the CIA, in the world already disproved any reputed links that came up in the past. Idiologically, they just don't see things eye to eye.Originally posted by: laFiera
so what's new???
i remember a month ago or so people posting, "in due time the evidence of these weapons will come out"; looks like time is going and only the opposite is showing up---no WMD's to be found. If i remember correctly, the war was sold on this premise---imminent threat of these WMD's; of course, it wouldn't surprised me now if they find some type of evidence linking saddam to 9/11; something must justify the war.
The point is that the Administration told a bald-faced lie when they continued to vaguely link Saddam to 9/11 in selling the war; like I said, the funny thing is eventually, the majority of Americans bought this tasty untruth.
But I guess I agree with you; it wouldn't surprise me if they continued to sell a bill of false goods and revealed some tenuous "evidence" linking Saddam to 9/11.
And like I said previously, for the majority of Americans, they won't demand a serious justification for the war. To them, it's enough that Saddam was defeated and that the coalition won a swift, relatively clean, war.
Originally posted by: adlep
I wonder is this:
Where are all the pro-war people.
They used to were thread crapping every against-the-war thread over here...
And now, they are just very quiet...
I am in total agreement with you, so here's the distinction. I'm referring to major war operations, which were indeed swift and relatively clean.Originally posted by: BOBDN
You may be right about some Americans accepting the war no matter what the final reason is or isn't. But to characterize this as a "swift, relatively clean, war" isn't accurate IMO.
No one in their right mind ever though the armed forces of the USA wouldn't crush Iraq's forces, armed with 30 year old Russian equipment and suffering after 12 years of UN sanctions. The real job is just beginning and it wont be swift or clean. Iraq is in near total anarchy and our troops are being asked to be policeman. Not a job they are trained for although I'm sure they will give it their best effort. Still it isn't fair to ask the military to become cops. And it isn't fair to put them in harms way trying to police an entire nation. Our troops are in more danger now it seems than when the war was being waged. They are now facing guerilla warfare waged from within the Iraqi population they are trying to restore order to.
If all this has been done by the administration based on lies then it's time to appoint another independent prosecutor and get to the bottom of this.
Shhhhhh! You'll wake them.Originally posted by: BOBDN
Maybe they are waiting very quietly for the sound of the other shoe dropping.Originally posted by: adlep
I wonder is this:
Where are all the pro-war people.
They used to were thread crapping every against-the-war thread over here...
And now, they are just very quiet...
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Shhhhhh! You'll wake them.Originally posted by: BOBDN
Maybe they are waiting very quietly for the sound of the other shoe dropping.Originally posted by: adlep
I wonder is this:
Where are all the pro-war people.
They used to were thread crapping every against-the-war thread over here...
And now, they are just very quiet...
Originally posted by: Brie
Ill stand up and stay that i am still pro war...
I find it hard to believe that Saddam lacks ANY wmd at all. In addition i dont see why Saddam made a big huge deal by blocking UN inspectors from specific sites and at one point kicking them out of the country. He had the support of many people for getting UN embargos lifted! so why kick the inspectors out??
I do agree that Bush and many parts of the government exaggurated evidence for WMD...Dont all leaders do this?? The nature of these weapons themselves should prove to all that they do not pose an immedate threat. Almost everyone agrees that (lets say) if he does indeed have biological and chemical weapons that he LACKS the means to deliver them effectivly to a large number of people. I think the reason why a big stink was made about the immedate threat of these weapons was specifically because we dont really know the truth. Did anyone expect the Sarin gas attacks in Japan, or 9-11 or any other attacks were even possible??
I believe the idea that this is some elaborate plot on Bush's part to go to war on Iraq is not convincing enough. What does Bush have to gain by going to war. He knew that it would be unpoular and people would protest. He knew that many countries did not support him and had many chances to back down yet he still pushed...why??
My bet is that Sadaam is laughing his ass of now because he ordered the elimination of these weapons (whatever was remaining) right before the attacks. Think about it...Everyone hates the United State's policy including a significant portion of its own citizens directly due to the war!! Sadaam has won in the end. America look like an imperialist power while the Arab world in starting to unify against us. We have invaded Afganistan and Iraq. And now we are starting to have more problems with Iran, Syria and Saudia Arabia. Sounds like Sadaam has won a pretty big victory to me.
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
I'm not surprised. I feel pretty silly for believing them when they said Iraq had WMD back in January. With each day that passes, we find the news to be quite the opposite. I think their should be an investigation on this. A lot of families who lost and continue to lose family members each day are probably feeling betrayed right now. I'm willing to be that the morale is low in Iraq for our brave servicemen and women. Imagine yourself in a country with total anarchy. You have no business even being there. Their are no WMD and you are being attacked everyday. Driving around cities trying to prevent looting and violence. Who knows if someone in that crowd has a grenade ready to toss it your way or that person at a checkpoint is going to blow himself up. What Bush did was shameful.
Originally posted by: prometheusxls
I feel the same. Its a shame that this administration has shown such a cavalier attitude with their over use, of the military and the very dangerous policy of preemptive war. It is unclear what if any affect the Iraq war was to have on our strategic goals of anti-terrorism.