Originally posted by TourDeForce:

Those discrepancies had to be accounted for or we could surmise it was possible they were falling into the hands of terrorists, or people who could/would sell them to terrorists. This was post 9/11 remember?


what intel supported the missing wmds might be going to terrorists? i recall the intel supporting saddam would likely keep it to himself since he didn't associate with terrorists like al qaeda. does that count for anything? where were you getting your assumptions from?

Originally posted by TourDeForce:
You're playing political roulette with the lives of innocent people all over the world. What will you tell the survivors of a chemical attack, who watched their loved ones die a painful death??


this sounds like something straight out of the bush admin scare brochure. so iraq was planning a chemical attack on the US? just not true or probable according to our best information at the time.

Originally posted by TourDeForce:
Much of the world looks to the US for leadership in situations like this.


leadership like what? selecting the information as means to an end? when the end was determined before the means was available? i think you all can agree that regime change in iraq was likely a top goal of the bush admin as soon as he was elected president. do you believe in absence of a clear link to al qaeda, evidence he was developing nukes, or evidence he would provide wmds to terrorists that the bush admin would have had support for a pre-emptive attack on iraq? i'd like a serious response to that question.

Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:

It wouldn't have been a pre-emptive attack, though, it would have been a reactive attack. It would...and SHOULD...have been:

"Iraq has been delinquent in meeting its obligations to the UN and has been actively aggressive against Coalition forces and its own population, and after the past decade of permissiveness from UN member nations, the United States has determined that said behavior is demonstrative of the Hussein regime's desire to continue in its extremist, expansionist, and belligerent behavior. This will be put to an end by force unless said activities cease immediately and Saddam Hussein steps down and allows a multilateral democratic government to form in his place."


bush admin tried that at first and it didn't work as a solid case for war. that's when the terrorists getting wmds from saddam, links to 9/11, and nuclear dev by iraq came into play.

Originally posted by �¡Oracle!:
- The members of the Senate Intelligence Committee all have access to the same intelligence as the Executive branch.


you do understand there are certain levels of classification that not even the SIC have access to right? this stuff wouldn't have been visible to them at the time the decisions were being made. why not? is it right that opposing views were discouraged or given less weight? i do recall rummy making special visits to the various inteligence agencies and requesting they beef up the case.

if my boss came to me and said i want more info showing that the sky is orange, do you think i would show him pictures of a blue sky?

'03 Saab 9-5 Aero