• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Topic: Bush Administration Rewrites History

  1. #1

    Bush Administration Rewrites History

    sponsored links

    I'm hearing a lot of "we were victims of bad intelligence" coming from the Bush admin lately re the invasion. Seriously, can memories be that short? It's difficult not to forget all the hype leading up to the invasion: senior administration officials were absolutely determined to invade Iraq. Hardly a case of "What choice did we have, the CIA kept insisting that there were proven links to Al Qaeda, and proven weapons of mass destruction! So we had no alternative." OK, the senate report was limited to the issue of the reliability of intelligence, and not the issue of the role of the White House. Seems to me we should be hearing more about the latter. I dont' buy the implication that the Bush-boys were mere victims of misinformation.


  2. #2

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    It appears not all the intelligence was faulty. Two new commission reports from Britain and France seems to now support the claim that Iraq was actively trying to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger.

    Associated Press story - Iraw uranium claim gets some support
    Brian W. Ralston

    Check out my new FREE iPhone App! Click Here!

  3. #3

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    Though Wilson reported to U.S. officials there was "nothing to the story" that Niger sold uranium to Iraq, the CIA and DIA were intrigued by one element of his trip. Wilson had said a former prime minister of Niger, Ibrahim Mayaki, mentioned a visit from an Iraqi delegation in 1999 that expressed interest in expanding commercial ties with Niger, the world's third largest producer of mined uranium. Mayaki believed this meant they were interested in buying uranium.
    Gosh, that proves it then!

    For God's sake Brian, that article is nothing but a lot of unfounded conjecture. Just to clarify - nobody is diputing that such unfounded conjecture ever existed about Saddam. But it takes rather more than that to justify a war claiming thousands of fatalities.

    Gee, somebody from Iraq visited Niger.

    There are an awful lot of steps to take from there to the position that Saddam had an active nuclear weapons program that was a threat to the world. How likely would he have been to actually buy the stuff? What was it intended for? Did he have the technological infrastructure and economic means to develop it? (almost certainly a "no" to that one).

    Try imagining how an article like that would stand up in a domestic court of law and you'll see how ludicrous it is. Try prosecuting your neighbour for manufacturing hard drugs, because somebody from his house once visited the house of a known drug dealer. That's the kind of level of connection you're talking about. You wanna start wars because of THAT?

    And the Butler report here in the UK came to the same conclusion as your own - that there was absolutely no evidence Saddam had WMDs, and the intelligence was faulty. But of course none of that was good honest Mr Blair's fault, oh no. It was those pesky MI6 boys that fed him the wrong stories. Completely unguided by his own agenda, of course.

  4. #4

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    why didn't you quote just a little more?

    The British inquiry said it was generally accepted that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999, and there was intelligence from several sources that the visit was to acquire uranium. "Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible," the report said.

    The Senate committee also described various reports about Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from French, British and unidentified foreign governments.
    Brian W. Ralston

    Check out my new FREE iPhone App! Click Here!

  5. #5

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    You have to at least accept the possibility that Bush made the right decision to go to war -- based on the intelligence before him and nothing else. As we are beginning to see, the CIA has some serious problems to address, but if indeed the decision to go to war was based on the CIA's misinformation, this does not in and of itself make Bush a liar.

    And it's not as if Bush was alone in his suspicions of Iraq's WMD program either. Heck, even Clinton (and several other prominent Dems) said Saddam was a threat. So did most of Western Europe. How could they think otherwise after the guy openly violated over a dozen UN resolutions? Maybe everyone was just wrong, but it doesn't make them liars.

    JohnGant, you may not "buy the implication that the Bush-boys were mere victims of misinformation", but I think you have to accept the very real possibility that this was all that indeed happened.

  6. #6

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    Not only did Clinton and Gore say Saddam was a threat, so did Kerry and Edwards. Congress was given full access to the same intelligence that Bush was and they also determined that the threat was credible.

    It's good to know that now that it's politically expedient, many of those that voted to go to war are acting as if they had nothing to do with it. Now THAT's leadership. {note sarcasm}

  7. #7

    Thumbs down Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    You guys are kidding, right? This is the biggest case of "wag the dog" ever. Check the chonology... it was most definitely a course of action in search of an excuse.
    Houston Haynes - Titan Line Music

  8. #8

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    Even though the stated policy of the Clinton administration, (who bombed Iraq during Monica season) was regime change......and John Edwards is filmed on a network interview saying he considered Sadaam a threat and would invade whether or not the UN backed us.........liberals are still Bush bashing....
    and comment little on the fact that now in two countries 54 million people now live under democratic constitutions.....schools are being rebuilt, children vaccinated, there is talk radio in the capital of Iraq....mass graves are no longer being dug, children are not being imprisoned and women are not being capriciously raped.....Libya has turned over vast amounts of chemical and atomic weapons program material (the estimate of Libya's WMD production was UNDERESTIMATED).... Oh and French, German and Russian companies are no longer illegally making a bundle off the corrupted oil for food program.. which may have something to do with their stand in the security council......intelligence errors were made and they were made possible by the Gutting of the human intelligence capacities of the CIA by guess who?

  9. #9

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    moosethree, to say that what you call "Bush bashing" is richly deserved would be one of the biggest understatements in the history of understating.

    Invading Iraq was a *horrible* idea right from the beginning, even if the intelligence had been correct (as I believed it was). There was no way it was going to succeed. What we've brought to Iraq is anarchy, not democracy, and it was plainly obvious that this was what was going to happen.

    Apart from that, war is a total failure, a last resort to be used in self-defense. I don't believe in starting them just because you *think* it's in your interest.

    Finally, anyone who thinks oil isn't at the root of all this is sadly mistaken.
    We have to put our focus on developing alternative energy systems, because all this is only going to get worse and worse as oil becomes increasingly scarce. I've read conflicting reports about when that's going to happen, but it's surely going to happen.

    It's easy to sell wars. People are idiots. "Duh, I hate French people. Saddam bad. Duh, I'm patriotic so I support war. Let's go kick some [nss][nss][nss]!" But you have to take a step back and look at the geopolitical reasons for the whole situation.

  10. #10

    Re: Bush Administration Rewrites History

    By the way, except for his using "off of" which makes my skin crawl , this is a great essay on the subject.


Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts