WMD's Fuck-up.

Haven't had the need to with you. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

tisk tisk ... how quickly you forget. maybe I should start keeping records


oh ye of corny dogs and MD20/20

Oh, yeah. Forgot that one. Of course, I had MD 20/20 and corny dogs for lunch.

tomorrow is watermelon and Thnuderbird Tuesday

write it down.

Two CIA agents knew for a fact there were no wmd's,and told Tenent,Tenet knew and told Bush, Bush told Tenent it didnt matter. Tenent didnt tell Powell and Powell presented what was given to him to congress. The UN ask Bush for a couple more months to complete their sweep making damn sure Saddam/Iraq was clean.. He couldnt wait two months and relied on the word of a thug posing as a chemist who suppposedly worked for saddam ... read about Curveball.

the entire invasion was a lie .. Bush ignored the intel given to him before the invasion.then used the excuse his intel was bad after the invasion.

Hes a fucking traitor and a war criminal. Originally Posted by CJ7

Fascinating you should mention "Curveball" as a "qualifier" for your initial assertion. Yes, Curveball was one of the liars. Do read about him. Do read and understand that it was Curveball's contributions that gave the intelligence community’s interpretation of Saddam Hussein’s motives and behavior plausibility: a plausibility that other, alternative analysis did not. Hence the findings of both the WMD Commission and the Butler report support Bush's conclusion that from the intelligence available, Saddam possessed WMD.

before curveball Tenent told Bush there were no wmd's

and do you understand starting a war on the word of a thug without making sure his word was the truth is nothing more than a dereliction of duty on the part of the ENTIRE Bush War Cartel?

before curveball Tenent told Bush there were no wmd's

and do you understand starting a war on the word of a thug without making sure his word was the truth is nothing more than a dereliction of duty on the part of the ENTIRE Bush War Cartel? Originally Posted by CJ7

Your 20/20 hindsight opinion doesn't mean anything, CBJ7. The information available to Bush indicated Saddam had WMD; that's borne out in post war studies.

wrong.

wrong. Originally Posted by CJ7

The WMD Commission and the Butler report support Bush's conclusion that from the intelligence available, Saddam possessed WMD.

The WMD Commission and the Butler report support Bush's conclusion that from the intelligence available, Saddam possessed WMD. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

sept 02 two cia officials told tenent saddam was clean, Tenent told Bush and Bush blew the intel off

FACTS as later reported in 06 by the cia.


timelines are a bitch

sept 02 two cia officials told tenent saddam was clean, Tenent told Bush and Bush blew the intel off

FACTS as later reported in 06 by the cia.


timelines are a bitch Originally Posted by CJ7

The findings of two CIA agents doesn't necessarily outweigh the findings of scores of others. Subsequently, the WMD Commission and the Butler report support Bush's conclusion that from the intelligence available, Saddam possessed WMD.

To be THAT wrong on information of such dramatic importance implies either an intentional disregard for the truth, or a screw up of epic proportions. Either of which our government is capable of doing.

Given the oil and defense industries that have been profiting so well from this debacle, I tend to side with the former, however, it is still possible that the latter is the case.

the Butler Report was in 04, conducted by the Brits.

in 06 AMERICAN/CIA AGENTS went on record in saying they provided Tenent documented hard core evidence Saddam didnt have wmd's in 2002, and Tenent told the president exactly that prior to the invasion.

Fact

To be THAT wrong on information of such dramatic importance implies either an intentional disregard for the truth, or a screw up of epic proportions. Either of which our government is capable of doing.

Given the oil and defense industries that have been profiting so well from this debacle, I tend to side with the former, however, it is still possible that the latter is the case. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You need only look back to December 7, 1941, to find a similar intelligence failure -- or to the Iranian Hostage situation where American intelligence again failed.

Yes, this isn't the first time "military intelligence" was an oxymoron.

but was it the first time military intel was completely ignored and the country went to war anyway?

sure it was.