home

Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's

By TChris, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 06:30:31 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Another report -- this one by a presidential commission led by Laurence Silberman and Charles Robb -- criticizes the intelligence community for its assessment of Iraq's WMD's prior to the U.S. invasion.

A report made public this morning concludes that American intelligence agencies were "dead wrong" in almost all of their prewar assessments about the state of unconventional weapons in Iraq, and that on issues of this importance "we simply cannot afford failures of this magnitude." It adds, "The harm done to American credibility by our all too public intelligence failures in Iraq will take years to undo."

The failure was in large part the result of analytical shortcomings, the report adds, saying "intelligence analysts were too wedded to their assumptions about Saddam's intentions," referring to the ousted Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein."

While the Bush administration and its apologists point to other countries that arrived at the same conclusions, the report reminds readers that "in the end, it was the United States that put its credibility on the line, making this one of the most public - and most damaging - intelligence failures in recent American history."

Update: Maureen Dowd takes on the administration's claim that the commission "found no evidence that political pressure from the White House or Pentagon contributed to the mistaken intelligence." Her take: "That's hilarious."

< 38 Detainees to be Freed From Guantano | Terri Schiavo is Dead >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's | 54 comments (54 topical)
    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 07:54:27 AM EST
    Eli - If I am willing to believe (I must stretch for this) that decision-makers even believed Hussein had WMD when they launched the war - then your absolutely right. There was no proof of WMD's, and at the time it was illogical to me there would be - Iraq had been under a mostly effective embargo for a while. What was found was what I thought - they had not had the money to maintain these programs after 1991 and they had degenerated to nothing. President Bush simply wanted to go to Iraq again - and used the fact that you cannot easily prove you do not have something as its reason. If the administration had simply said this is one of the worst, most brutal dictators around - and we should have taken him out in 1991 and need to correct that now - I might have actually respected them more but the reason wouldn't have been good enough. Kerry had one sound bite that resonated with me - "The US used to go to war when it had to, not when it wanted to".

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#3)
    by Darryl Pearce on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 07:59:59 AM EST
    Dubya talks a good speech: "Our immediate strategy is to eliminate terrorist threats abroad so we do not have to face them here at home. The theory here is straightforward: Terrorists are less likely to endanger our security if they're worried about their own security. When terrorists spend their day struggling to avoid death or capture they are less capable of arming and training to commit new attacks. We will keep the terrorists on the run until they have nowhere left to hide." Sure wish I could believe him. Years ago, he said, "Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on television, and covert operations, secret even in success." I infer from this statement that there is no praise when they do well; likewise, no consequences when they screw up. One can either destroy or one can build. Both cannot be done in the same place at the same time.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:18:05 AM EST
    BushCo was dead wrong about Iraq, Lybia and presently knows disturbingly little about NK and Iran, yet the "saber rattling" contiunues at fever pitch. It's like Rosana Rosanadana is running the country.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:21:40 AM EST
    My concern in Iraq has long not been whether we had reason to be there or not this time - that cow is out of the barn. As a christian regisistered Republican I voted against Bush and for Kerry on the grounds of this war alone. Now the issue is what to do. I am not crying over Saddam Hussein - he was a world class butcher who should have been taken out in 1991. We took out a "stable" regime (stable by terror alone) and must see through the process of leaving them with a stable government in the end - whatever the cost. The world has a view of the United States that it will not stick out the logical course of its decisions over the long haul if it costs us too much - largely earned. In my view, a greater crime than the current war in Iraq would be to leave the people of Iraq in a state of economic and political instability (we have created) to fend for themselves and clean up our mess

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:25:31 AM EST
    Ok so we were dead wrong. I have no issue with it provided that we learn from the mistake. It was well believed that saddam had not destroyed his wmd and saddam kept up the appearance that he had them to deter an attack. I was never in support of the war under the premise of "our safety" and had Bush stated his reasons for war simply as freeing iraq from a vicious dictator and been upfront about the costs i would have reluctantly supported it. Saddam was definitely contained but the sanctions were killing too many iraqis, not saddam. I wish we also would have lobbied more intensely for int'l support which i think was another horrible mistake, but alas, Saddam is removed and at least the Iraqis have a shot at a government that is less oppressive. I still am against the war under the auspices with which it was "sold" but the wmd assessment (not threat assessment) was widely believed...

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:30:25 AM EST
    et al - All of you conveniently forget the Kay Report that provided a great dealy of information about his efforts to restart his programs for WMD's. "Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Even those senior officials we have interviewed who claim no direct knowledge of any on-going prohibited activities readily acknowledge that Saddam intended to resume these programs whenever the external restrictions were removed. Several of these officials acknowledge receiving inquiries since 2000 from Saddam or his sons about how long it would take to either restart CW production or make available chemical weapons. "In the delivery systems area there were already well advanced, but undeclared, on-going activities that, if OIF had not intervened, would have resulted in the production of missiles with ranges at least up to 1000 km, well in excess of the UN permitted range of 150 km. These missile activities were supported by a serious clandestine procurement program about which we have much still to learn. In the chemical and biological weapons area we have confidence that there were at a minimum clandestine on-going research and development activities that were embedded in the Iraqi Intelligence Service. While we have much yet to learn about the exact work programs and capabilities of these activities, it is already apparent that these undeclared activities would have at a minimum facilitated chemical and biological weapons activities and provided a technically trained cadre." If Iraq had not been invaded, sooner or later these programs would have come to fruition, and the results sold or given to terrorists. After the deaths and destruction the Left would have wrung their hands, screamed to not invade anything and continue a failed criminal justice effort, and, criticized the Repub President for not stopping it.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#8)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:36:38 AM EST
    PPJ: That said, containment was working and Saddam posed no threat to us. North Korea has a nuclear weapon and they pose no threat to us, they pose a threat to S. Korea but not to us. Want to depose Kim Jong Il because he poses a threat or because he is a human rights despot? If we could get a broad coalition to depose him with military action I would not oppose it. Not because he is a threat but because he is a monster.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#9)
    by desertswine on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:42:44 AM EST
    Iraq had no wmds. They knew that. Iraq was also sitting on a vast "sea of oil." They knew that, too.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:44:18 AM EST
    PPJ James Knew it woudn't be long before the old REMF heavy, S2 light brigade hove into view. Kay report discredited by Kay Link Shredded here Right up there with the flat earth theory I'd say. Get over it !

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:44:53 AM EST
    PPJ I'll carry on this argument as another conservative. NO, ASPIRATIONS TO START UP A PROGRAM ARE NOT REASONS TO GO TO WAR. If that were the true reason for this war, we would be in Tehran or the capital of North Korea right now - where they have gone beyond aspirations. The Bush Administration came into office looking to take out Saddam Hussein, and looking for a justification it could use to sell that to the American people and the world. If our intelligence community really believed he was anywhere near a program that could threaten us or even his neighbors again we should disband the CIA and subcontract intelligence services to the French or Russians who knew better. You do not serve truth, or conservatism, or anything else if you can't see that at the minimum our intelligence community told the President what he wanted to hear instead of the truth - and at the worst Bush lied to the American people to justify this war. It doesn't matter tho: to paraphrase Harry Truman - either way the buck stops on President Bush's desk

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 08:58:32 AM EST
    Bush and business Extraordinary Rat! and the our non-government is made of of murderous Traitors who need the rope of justice! the enemies of this nation that is falling apart are now running it into the third world. Remember the people make a government and people suffer under that government, if the system attacks for you, it is your "failing" to see what it is doing for its own reasons. arms can make you free but can also put you in a death camp, what do you want to do?(do i need a lawyer? in the land of freedom?)

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 09:37:36 AM EST
    JCh and JLV..well said gentlemen.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:08:26 AM EST
    I second what kdog said...
    JCh and JLV..well said gentlemen.
    If this isn't a textbook example of why preemptive war without a broad consensus is a terrible idea, I don't know what is. The history books are waiting, Dubya... PPJ - Whatever. You're the only guy on the Planet who really believes the crap you're spewing. Even the people who made it up don't believe it. I was wondering if you were a Right Wing operative sent to TL to disrupt consensus building, but even Carl Rove wouldn't spew that hooey. Don't waste your time with him JHC.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:09:30 AM EST
    ... that's JCH. (although the other would be real cool)

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#16)
    by Johnny on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:24:33 AM EST
    Now that the dead are dead, this is too little too late. A public apology from the un-accountable one would go a long way to salving the split in this nation.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:26:22 AM EST
    Seem to be blocked now hmmmmmmm

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:29:43 AM EST
    Guess not. If we all agree that the war had at best inadequate justification - what now? We are required by moral and ethical considerations to stand fast and see to the establishment of a stable government in Iraq. Hussein kept the massive religious, political, and tribal differences in Iraq in check through massive brutality. We now have to stand in no matter what the cost and see that a better system for working through those differences is found

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#19)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 10:51:19 AM EST
    Here is the report in its entirety for those that are interested: http://www.whitehouse.gov/wmd/index.html

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#20)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 11:04:36 AM EST
    While we have much yet to learn about the exact work programs and capabilities of these activities, it is already apparent that these undeclared activities would have at a minimum facilitated chemical and biological weapons activities and provided a technically trained cadre Once we gave the Iraqis the technology in the 80's, there was no way they could unlearn it. They would always have the ability to restart a program. The UN disarmament program was 98% successful, and the sanctions eliminated the possibility of Iraq getting enough equipment to restart a clandestine program. This was evident by the report of UN inspectors in Feb. 03. It was all there. It was just ignored by US. If I were a member of the CIA today I would feel totally betrayed. But hey, we don't know those folks anyway so there's really no one to blame. Probably just a few bad apples anyway. If Iraq had not been invaded, sooner or later these programs would have come to fruition This is just one more self-deluding rationalization of the blind patriots in this country who backed Bush. They will concoct ANY explanation to avoid acknowledging that they were wrong and their mistake has resulted in a horrific atrocity against innocent civilians. They can't escape it. They screwed up and untold numbers of helpless people have been shot, blown up or incinerated as a result. Democracy through the barrel of a gun is not Democracy, despite your bogus elections. Notice how we've become desensitized to the word mistake?

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 12:17:58 PM EST
    The evidence: 1. No evidence that Saddam had WMDs. 2. No evidence that Saddam ever cooperated with Al-Qaeda. 3. No evidence that Saddam ever supported terrorism against the USA. 4. No evidence that Saddam's regime posed the slightest threat to America whatsoever. 5. Thousands of Iraqis killed while being "liberated." 6. Millions of Iraqis condemned to live in sickness, poverty, and constant danger of death. 7. All of Iraq condemned to live under a regime that is styled democratic, but will almost certainly turn into a fundamentalist Islamic regime. 8. Over 1,500 Americans who signed up to defend their country, and whose lives have been thrown away by the Bush administration. 9. Tens of thousands of family members and friends of those dead Americans, having a hard time assimilating the fact that their sons/daughters/husbands/wives/friends have died for nothing. 10. President Bush extremely concerned about Terri Schiavo. When will the war crimes trial begin?

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#22)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:16:52 PM EST
    If there are tens of thousands grieving family members who are distraught over their siblings' meaningless sacrifice, let them unite and speak to the matter. If they were so inclined perhaps future administrations would reflect on the cost of war politically with a bit less sanctimony. As of today I have yet to see evidence of any such acrimony toward the casus beli of the conflict on behalf of our armed forces.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:31:14 PM EST
    Snod and JC - Perhaps, if you take the time, you will note that I never claimed that Kay said they WMD's. And if you care to dig through the archives, you will find that I never have. So all of the links proving he didn't say that are a waste of time. What I did say was that Saddam was trying to get back into the WMD busines, and that is what the Kay Report says. And I merely noted that if he had been left alone, sooner or later he would have accomplished that, with the results I noted. BTW - I am not a conservative, as I have commented many times that I am a social liberal. You might try reading some other comments. But. I am a hawk on defense, and the Left should never be allowed to get anywhere near the defense of this country. Which is a perfectly normal political position. Repeat after me: You don't have to be a radical leftie to be a liberal. We existed and were called Democrats for years and years, before you folks managed to sieze control og the party. And, if you will read Bush's '03 STOTU speech, you will see that he noted that there was no imminent danger, but called for a strategy of pre-emptive strikes against countries who were believed to be preparing to mount attcks against us. Now you may not like tha strategy, but that is what it was, and that is what he did. And we may yet be in Tehran. As for North Korea, that genie is out of the bottle. Said bottle's top having been removed by Clinton, Albright and Carter's policy of appeasement and blather. If we do go, the cost will be extremely high, thanks to them. I guess we will wait until there first missile hits the west coast... Say, Seattle? Now, I agree that our intelligence servces were in bad shape, and I agree that the FBI and the CIA were not talking. On the latter we can lay the blame clearly at the feet of the Clinton administration, and the Gorelick memo that placed a chinese firewall between them. The lack of human intelligence can be traced back to the Church Committee, and its devasting results on the CIA. We can also throw in Carter, Reagan, GHWB, and Clinton for not fixing it. Instead, they believed a satellite snap shot could tell us all, and we wouldn't have to dirty our hands. Wrong. mfox - You have demonstrated such an huge amount of ignorance on several subjects, even admitted it yourself, that it is difficult to take your comments seriously. But to comment that I must be an agent sent by Bush to disrupt the "consensus building" of a blog, is so deliciously funny that I laughed until I had tears in my eyes..... Secret agent man, secret agent man, they've given me a moniker, and taken away my name....

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#24)
    by Sailor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:36:36 PM EST
    Another minor footnote in the report may explain why the Prez's commission didn't sinf any prez wrongdoing:
    "Our review has been limited by our charter to the question of alleged policymaker pressure on the Intelligence Community to shape its conclusions to conform to the policy preferences of the Administration. There is a separate issue of how policymakers used the intelligence they were given and how they reflected it in their presentations to Congress and the public. That issue is not within our charter and we therefore did not consider it nor do we express a view on it."
    And PPJ, quit lying about what the Gorelick memo said. We've debunked your point, you just refuse to face reality.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#25)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 01:45:01 PM EST
    PPJ: Kim Jong built the nuke under Bush's watch, whilst we were invading Iraq. Please don't obfuscate the issues. Bush I, Bush II and Clinton had the same intel, Bush II decided to invade the country. Which leads to the greater question of when the decision was made and for what reason. Mushroom clouds rape rooms and 300,000 murdered iraqis who have never been found were the primary reasons for the war. Please stop the nonsensical defense of the sell of this war to our citizens. It was sold under false pretenses although I do feel the end result is positive. A broad coaltion which includes more than 300 Polish troops would have been far more appealing in the worlds eyes. The horse is dead yet it still getting beat, Mr. Ed deserves better.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 02:20:38 PM EST
    Che - You can dance, but you can't lead. First, show me a link that proves we gave them nucelar technology. And the technology for gas, germs, etc., was pretty well available. JL - Come now, everyone had the same belief. Let's revisit some quotes from high ranking demos: ""We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002" ""We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen.Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002" ""We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 " Want more? I got'em. Sailor - Your claims and your results are entirely different.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 02:46:57 PM EST
    Glad to see you backpeddling on the Kay report. I recon you just like to bait the guys (you seem to be a master). Let's play the 'famous last words game' then. "My first pledge will be to restore integrity to the White House. And I'll fire anyone who has lied to the American people or the United States Congress." (Source: Al Gore, in a February 2, 1988 presidential debate) More Here The war in Iraq itself has not made America safer and has not made the world safer. Ted Kennedy ( 5/13/2003 ) Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bob Graham charged Tuesday that the Bush administration sat on key intelligence data that could have prevented yesterday's al Qaeda car bombing attack in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia - as well as the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. "There was information which the administration and its agencies knew before Sept. 11 but was not acted upon," Graham told reporters. "That same information was available today. It's not being acted upon today." The Florida Democrat then insisted, "That failure to act contributed to Sept. 11 and the failure to act today continues [to leave] Americans in a vulnerable circumstance." Want more? I got'em.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#28)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:07:48 PM EST
    Jim, did you miss the post entirely? My complaint was about your reference to N. Korea, the nukes were built during our invastion of Iraq. Here is the post which I am certain you read and were trying to deflect by posting that drivel: Ok so we were dead wrong. I have no issue with it provided that we learn from the mistake. It was well believed that saddam had not destroyed his wmd and saddam kept up the appearance that he had them to deter an attack. I was never in support of the war under the premise of "our safety" and had Bush stated his reasons for war simply as freeing iraq from a vicious dictator and been upfront about the costs i would have reluctantly supported it. Saddam was definitely contained but the sanctions were killing too many iraqis, not saddam. I wish we also would have lobbied more intensely for int'l support which i think was another horrible mistake, but alas, Saddam is removed and at least the Iraqis have a shot at a government that is less oppressive. I still am against the war under the auspices with which it was "sold" but the wmd assessment (not threat assessment) was widely believed...

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#29)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:10:04 PM EST
    As an aside, I dreamt that PPJ and I met and were arguing over going to war with Iran and I won PPJ over in the argument. PPJ, you are far too much in my psyche, or perhaps it is just the sleep deprivation from having a newborn in me house......

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#30)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:13:41 PM EST
    "And the technology for gas, germs, etc., was pretty well available." I will try to use this next time a dealer is arrested for Marijuana sale. Gees your honor, I know it is wrong to sell it, but it is available everywhere.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#31)
    by Sailor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:25:35 PM EST
    PPJ, before you lie again about the Gorelick memo, deal with "Bin Laden Determined To Attack the US", at which point, unlike in Ms. Schiavo's case, gwb stayed on vacation. Quoting politicians who believed the admin's lies does not actually prove any point except that the admin lied to them. And now, apparently because this admin doesn't care about the safety of americans, the world's largest exporter of nuclear tech and research, pakistan, has just been sold the delivery vehicle for delivering them. And now this admin cries wolf again relying on outdated reports by iranian expats to gin up for another war.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 03:58:08 PM EST
    A Commander in Chief is held to a little higher standard when making decisions to go to war then politicians generating their next sound bite. As long as this idiocy is defended it will not be learned from.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 05:02:42 PM EST
    JCH writes - "As long as this idiocy is defended it will not be learned from." Speaking of idiocy.... And which is worse, sound bites or spewing out talking points? Bush was getting PDBs, only problem was....we knew OBL wanted to attack, we just didn't know where. I know, details, details. And what would you do? Wait for an attack? That doesn't work in a nuclear world. In this life you have to pay your money and take your chances. And put up with the complaints from the peanut gallery. That's what a leader does.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#34)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 07:37:40 PM EST
    a leader "leads" meaning people will follow, at least last I checked webster and the common definition of the word. We are more hated, more despised, less trusted and generally viewed as imperialistic as a direct result of a lack of coalition building leading up to the war. Leading does not include failure to admit mistakes, spinning and exclusion, those are traits of tyrants and bullies. Bush is not a leader. He is decisive and a man of his word, but so was McCarthy and I cannot see anyone crowning him a "leader".

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 at 09:35:29 PM EST
    This is what irritates me - where did Osama Bin Laden come from in the discussion of Iraq. President Bush didn't even TRY to make a case of Iraqi involvement with Bin Laden prior to this war - that has been backfill since. For the record, I supported Iraq 1991, and Afganistan - and see no reason to waiver. Bin Laden created a political situation in the United States where the 2nd Iraq war could occur - but other than that there is no relationship. I support continued US involvement for the course in Iraq - but until those who launched this war do some self-criticism and take responsibility for their actions dont even talk to me about President Bush's leadership

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 06:11:38 AM EST
    Jim said: we knew OBL wanted to attack, we just didn't know where. I know, details, details. Surely the same argument applies to Saddam. In which case, why was it OK to leave OBL on the loose (when he had stated an intention to attack inside America and had shown himself able to do so) yet somehow it wasn't OK to leave Saddam, despite the fact that he hadn't threatened America and his ability to pose any threat at all was adequately restrained by the sanctions? Or does all this one come under your universal "the world changed on Sept 11th" get-out clause?

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 06:59:23 AM EST
    Ian - The answer is simple. A cost benefit analysis said that the resources required to catch/kill him were worth more than the benefit. You may disagree, I may disagree. Neither of us are President. How long do you want to beat the Saddam didn't do anything horse? It was clearly one of the countries identified for a pre-emptive strike based on history, intelligence and ability to make WMD's. Iran is another one. The strategy is simple: Get some democracies started in the ME and hope the new coubtries will not allow terrorists. JL - We elect leaders of the US, not the "rest of the world." As far as I am concerned, they can help or get out of the way. Their choice.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 07:02:38 AM EST
    JCH - Read Bush's '03 STOTU speech. It lays it all out.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#39)
    by Jlvngstn on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 07:03:33 AM EST
    I have no issue with that statement PPJ, Bush is still not a LEADER. He is decisive, convicted and headstrong, but failure to admit or acknowledge failure is one of the more obvious signs of insecurity and poor leadership. I do admire his decisiveness but it is also a fatal flaw when one cannot recognize, admit and demonstrate the ability to learn from a decisive mistake.....

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#40)
    by pigwiggle on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 07:12:53 AM EST
    Jlvngstn- “… Kim Jong built the nuke under Bush's watch, whilst we were invading Iraq. Please don't obfuscate the issues. … the nukes were built during our invastion of Iraq” March 20,2003; Iraq Invasion. April 25,2003; the DPRK’s now infamous ‘we got the bomb, what are you going to do about it’ taunt during trilateral DPRK, Chinese, American talks over the DPRK’s expulsion of the IAEA inspectors. Your timeline is a bit dubious. Jim- “we knew OBL wanted to attack, we just didn't know where. I know, details, details.” One of the few things that survived trade center 1 was a memorial to the folks that died in OBL first attempt at the building. He said he was coming back, and he did.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 07:44:08 AM EST
    PPJ - Everything President Bush said in the STOTU about WMD's in Iraq turned out to be WRONG; everything he said about al Qaeda was conjecture - still unproven. What did he lay out? Truth is - we are becoming the problem President Bush is talking about in the STOTU. We are the country using its military to force its views on other countries. Is this how you envison our future? Crossing the border into Iran; then jumping over to North Korea. And damn all the other democratic countries if they don't agree with us - we will kick these people's ass on our own. France and Russia were RIGHT not to go into Iraq - we probably owe the French a national apology for the way we talked about them. If we had not been so arrogant perhaps they could have swayed us. Your vision of our country's future is a scary thing - and if you do not see how arrogant and dangerous this concept is that may be scarier.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#42)
    by Sailor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 07:59:51 AM EST
    PPJ - At best bush is misinformed, at worse he's a liar, why would anyone use his speeches as a reference? He has no credibility, i.e. 'obl, wanted dead or alive' vs 'obl? we don't care about him anymore' gwb is a flipflopper of the worst sort, he gets americans killed when he lies.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 08:01:29 AM EST
    Pigwiggle, et.al. One of my biggest objections to Iraq BEFORE the invasion was that it was deflecting our attention, and troops, from finishing the job (still unfinished) in Afganistan. We have really moved on from chasing down al Qaeda. One of the perceptions - highly accurate - is that we will go in and change regimes in Afganistan, Iraq, etc. - but our short attention span doesn't allow us to stick around for the hard work of really building a stable government. We encourage actions like the Bay of Pigs, or the uprising of the Shiites of southern Iraq, and then leave them hanging out to dry (and die) when it is politically expediant to leave. Afganistan and Iraq will not have stable, secure, central governments capable of ruling and defending their own borders for years - and we should be committed to that process for the long haul, not trundling off to change the next government

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 09:00:46 AM EST
    Maureen Dowd: Still angling for the title "Journalism's Crazy Aunt in the Attic" when Helen Thomas dies. In the meantime, she'll just have to remain "That Twit at the New York Times".

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 09:13:27 AM EST
    PPJ:
    mfox - You have demonstrated such an huge amount of ignorance on several subjects, even admitted it yourself, that it is difficult to take your comments seriously
    Trust me the feelings are mutual. You should change your moniker to "do you have a link for that?" Myself and other folks have spent so much time proving your points illogical, incindiary and just plain ignorant that I am resentful of the huge drain you put on every thread while every sane person on the thread postpones rational dialog to address your claims. Of course if you didn't call me "stupid", "idiot" and the other choice names you use folks might notice that you don't fight logic with logic, but with infantile insults. You don't like my comments, put me on "manual ignore" like I try to do to you most of the time. I don't even have to see your name at the top of the post to know it's you anytime I see mfox and some form of name-calling unrelated to my posts. If it helps, PPJ, I'm PROUD to be considered an idiot by you - it's like a badge of honor. What is your political philosophy? You're the only person who I can't get a sense of? You've mentioned that your a reformed democrat of some kind? What do you think of Bush? Of the republican platform?. Just curious.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 09:16:19 AM EST
    Jlvngston:
    perhaps it is just the sleep deprivation from having a newborn in me house......
    Congrats and sympathies :).

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 09:26:31 AM EST
    Ian asks PPJ:
    In which case, why was it OK to leave OBL on the loose (when he had stated an intention to attack inside America and had shown himself able to do so) yet somehow it wasn't OK to leave Saddam,
    JIM ANSWERS:
    Ian - The answer is simple. A cost benefit analysis said that the resources required to catch/kill him were worth more than the benefit.
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Then, PPJ give us his source for unbiased political info:
    Read Bush's '03 STOTU speech. It lays it all out.
    ... and provides a link to the speech as if we would all read it and exclaim "of course"! slapping ourselves on the foreheads. "PPJ was right! It all makes sense now"! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 09:45:52 AM EST
    You are generally pretty rational, even though I disagree most of the time. Just curious... what's your beef with Thomas and Dowd. I don't read a lot of op-ed - have read Dowd and wouldn't classify us as quite kindred spirits but she seems pretty harmless compared to, say Bob Novak whose column I read recently filled with "two years ago I predicted" and "My confidential sources tell me". Him and Bush should have a runoff to see who's pic should be next to the word Hubris in the dictionary. ...no offense, just curious...

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 09:47:01 AM EST
    OOPS - Just put your name where mine should have been on above post JP. : ) ... a scary thought...hopefully not a Freudian slip!...

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#50)
    by Sailor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 10:10:29 AM EST
    I wonder if they had the same opinion of Dowd when she was attacking Clinton.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 10:10:49 AM EST
    Just came out on AP
    Doubts on Weapons Were Dismissed (Washington Post) - As former secretary of state Colin L. Powell worked into the night in a New York hotel room, on the eve of his February 2003 presentation to the U.N. Security Council, CIA officers sent urgent e-mails and cables describing grave doubts about a key charge he was going to make. On the telephone that night, a senior intelligence officer warned then-CIA Director George J. Tenet that he lacked confidence in the principal source of the assertion that Saddam Hussein's scientists were developing deadly agents in mobile laboratories.
    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#52)
    by Jlvngstn on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 10:24:00 AM EST
    Pig, thanks for the correction, my timing was not dubious it was down right wrong. Still under Bush's watch, but your point is well taken. After the United States went public with the North Korean program on October 16, 2002, Pyongyang announced its intention to further break its commitment to the Agreed Framework and restart its 5-MWe reactor and reprocessing plant and resume construction of two larger reactors. In December,2002, it removed the IAEA safeguard seals at the nuclear research center in Yongbyon, shut down the monitoring cameras, and ordered the IAEA inspectors out of the country. On January 10, 2003, this fast-moving train of events culminated in Pyongyang's announcement that North Korea would withdraw from the NPT--the only country ever to do so. According to the New York Times (January 31), U.S. satellites detected activity in North Korea throughout January that appeared to indicate it was removing its spent nuclear fuel rods from storage.

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#53)
    by Jlvngstn on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 10:35:30 AM EST
    Here is the timeline for North Korea's development of a nuclear weapon under Bush's tenure: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2604437.stm

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 03:55:38 PM EST
    Which part stumped you mfox, reading the speech or slapping yourself in the forehead? Har!

    Re: Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's (none / 0) (#55)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 01, 2005 at 07:02:06 PM EST
    Darryl, that quote: " It may include dramatic strikes, visible on television, and covert operations, secret even in success" includes the Bush family motto: 'Secret even in Success.' We are in the hands of a secret society that tells jokes for its own amusement.

    Report Criticizes Pre-War Assessment of WMD's | 54 comments (54 topical)