Who Really Lied To Start The War In Iraq?

[M.SIGGA]

Osama? According to the military, he's as good as in the bag!

wonderful. last I heard the latest U.S. intelligence is comming from Arab T.V. b/c while America can't find him Al Jezira gets an interview every other week :lol:

[Paladin D]

According to Kim Clement (http://kimclement.com/) we should be capturing Osama sometime before (or on) Easter. If it does come true... I'm gonna be freaked. :mellow:

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote]no one forgot about Osama. if we had not gone to war in Iraq do you really believe we would've found him by now? me neither...[/quote]

We would have had a higher chance of it. Iraq has eaten up a lot of soldiers and resources that could have been put to use in tracking bin Laden down. Way back in the dim mists of time, when all this started, certain elements in the government (ably assisted by the tabloid press) were claiming a connection between bin Laden and Hussein. I read about it in the [i]Daily Express[/i] (which was rabidly pro-war at first and then made an abrupt about-face when the war went pear-shaped and it saw an opportunity to discredit the Labour Party). No one remembers that lie any more. It is my belief that Bush just wanted an excuse to go into Iraq. Saddam Hussein was the chip on the family shoulder.

"This above all is the greatest treason: to do the right thing for the wrong reason." - T.S. Eliot.

[RezaMikhaeil]

Osama: Osama was forgotten about, as the number of troops in Afghanistan are having trouble keeping the peace amongst the drug lords [etc] let alone find Osama. If I were to put it into laymens terms: How the hell are you going to search every cave, every bunker, when you constantly being shot at by private militias that got more combatants then your army is? The President of Afghanistan said several months ago on public television that the drug lords got much more combatants then he does... US Troops don't even have enough troops to keep the Taliban in the south from reforming every few months, let alone find the time to search for that guy named Osama Bin Laden.

What led to going to war: Bush relied heavily on Chalabi and other supposed Exiled Iraqi citizens, that wanted to seize power for themselves after the invasion. The US and CIA gave Chalabi and others mass amounts of money, private luxury cars, etc. for false evidence that he provided. They should have known that his "intelligence" was severely lacking, as they asked him for evidence previous times and he severely misled them then also... Colin Powell was just doing what he was told, he and Condi Rice had publically said before 9-11 that they knew as a fact that Saddam hadn't gained the capability to gain arms, that he was unable to wage war, and that they [their administration] had done a good job keeping weapons from him, then later went back on that statement after 9-11.

Bottom Line: Mr. Bush should have had enough knowledge to know that his sources were unreliable.

Reza

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1257761' date='Apr 27 2007, 04:38 AM']"This above all is the greatest treason: to do the right thing for the wrong reason." - T.S. Eliot.[/quote]
you have just made my morning complete ... nothing makes me happier than a little T.S. Eliot. :

[The Joey-O]

[quote name='M.SIGGA' post='105950' date='Jan 27 2004, 01:36 AM']ok I'm not getting into this debate, but Bush had crappy unreliable intelligence (from the British, vengeful Iraqi exiles, and the CIA) mixed with actual records that Sadaam actually had weapons in the late 80s and early 90s he bought from America. So that is also a "possible" and important senario that isn't one of your poll picks.[/quote]

From what I understand, there was a mountain of evidence from our intelligence services. And, calling American or Brittish intelligence crappy is absurd. There is no better intelligence out there. Of course its not perfect. And, unfortunately, it's manipulatable. Personally, I suspect Cheney. My understanding of President Bush leads me to believe that he is neither sadistic enough nor intelligent enough to orchestrate a systematic manipulation of Brittish and American intelligence. Cheney (and maybe Karl Rove) both had the connections (and total the lack of a soul) to pull something like this off. Is it possible that the various intelligence services of America and the UK simultaneously experienced a significant quality shortage in the middle east? Yes, but it's not likely. What's more likely is what there's proof of. That the Bush administration reorganized the CIA and other intelligence agencies with people who are not just friendly to the Bush Administration but with people who are conspiculously contraversial for those positions. Also, there is significant evidence that there was personal tampering on the part of Cheney and/or Bush (my bet's on Cheney) in intelligence investigations.

Here's what I think: I think Cheney orchestrated the whole event for a whole myriad of reasons. Halliburton just moved its headquarters out to the middle east. I can't help but suspect that the Iraq situation has something to do with the move. I don't believe this was about getting Iraq's oil. I'm not sure what all the motivation is, but perhaps distraction is a big part of it all.

Anywho. That's my two cents.

[musturde]

Not to spark with anybody but wasn't it the Intelligence who screwed up, not Bush? I think Bush, with his given information, did the right thing but now looking back at hindsight, it's was a mistake. However, I would bet that another president would have done the same thing in his place.

Also, Osama Bin Laden is in my opinion no where near being caught. He's safe somewhere in the Middle East (many speculate Pakistan). Going in there would be suicide because of the large amount of militants in the area he's hiding. Even If he was just hiding in Afghanistan, Afghanistan is a big country, it's not that easy to search through every cave especially when he's well guarded.

[dairygirl4u2c]

this is just my impression when we went to war. i think bush either lied or stretched the truth saying there was a connection between iraq and al queda. if you read his state of the union address from back then you will see that. cheny says it was the media who was making a connectino and they've always been clear no connection, but i think the state of hte union and other things made him out to say there was a connection.

as for weopons etc, i believe bush had good reasons based on all that. i think the husseins men probably lied etc. my only point is that the white house isn't completely off scott free bc of it. (look at richard clark and how they were really pushing to say there was a connection when there was not, and how clark got fired for it...)

[jesussaves]

well, i should say he had sufficient reasons. i don't think the evidence was looked at very critically, as indicated at the end of this article.
[url="http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/bush-to-democrats-do-not-test-my-will-on-iraq/20072928-9yq.html"]http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/bush-to-d...072928-9yq.html[/url]

that they were so intent on linking iraq with al queda was probably less on wanting to find a reason the american's would buy to get iraq because of their weopons, and more about they seem to maybe have weopons but we're not gonna worry about it too much as they are bad people. and might have weopons soon.
and oil and other things too, it's all a big picture.

Edited April 28, 2007 by jesussaves

[jckinsman]

Hey !!!!! Let's not forget! 9/11 is not a number, It was a horrible day, I sat glued to the TV wondering when and where the next plane was going to hit. I was scared! No one who who's human wasn't! Remember Bush's speech??? He said if you were a terrorist, we were coming after you end of the story.(No not in those words) I don't think he was thinking, "Wow, here's a time to avenge my familys name"or "Hey let's go steal oil, now's our chance" (I could have alot of fun right now, but I will refrain!) No way, No matter what the liberal media's selling. I'm not buying it. Do I agree with the war? I will always be saddened by it. I do think that Bush felt threatened. After seeing what he did on that day. He was going to do what it took to bring them ALL down. But we as americans, want what we want, huh? We want it now. *mind drifts away to a scence in willy wonka and the chocolate factory,when the bratty spoiled girl enters the golden egg room and sing her song* Bush knew it was going to take time. Years! Come on people, Look what he's dealing with? Pull out now, and we will regret it! Do you realize what would happen? Can you grasp the whole picture globally????? YIKKES! The truth is I think we all would like to see it end. I think even Bush would agree. Can he really do that though? So going back to the question, Do you think Bush knew? I think he knew alot more then the public and media did (AS IT SHOULD BE) and I think he did what he needed to do, givin' the circumstance and the times. Never was a war waged so carefully. How quickly we forget! You think Bush wanted a war? I think you are nuts! Remember who started it............all of us on earth (religon,politics,$,your sister) Remember WHO will finish it! ..................pray for peace! JC

Edited April 29, 2007 by jckinsman

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='jckinsman' post='1259454' date='Apr 29 2007, 12:52 AM']Hey !!!!! Let's not forget! 9/11 is not a number, It was a horrible day, I sat glued to the TV wondering when and where the next plane was going to hit. I was scared! No one who who's human wasn't! Remember Bush's speech??? He said if you were a terrorist, we were coming after you end of the story.(No not in those words) I don't think he was thinking, "Wow, here's a time to avenge my familys name"or "Hey let's go steal oil, now's our chance" (I could have alot of fun right now, but I will refrain!) No way, No matter what the liberal media's selling. I'm not buying it. Do I agree with the war? I will always be saddened by it. I do think that Bush felt threatened. After seeing what he did on that day. He was going to do what it took to bring them ALL down. But we as americans, want what we want, huh? We want it now. *mind drifts away to a scence in willy wonka and the chocolate factory,when the bratty spoiled girl enters the golden egg room and sing her song* Bush knew it was going to take time. Years! Come on people, Look what he's dealing with? Pull out now, and we will regret it! Do you realize what would happen? Can you grasp the whole picture globally????? YIKKES! The truth is I think we all would like to see it end. I think even Bush would agree. Can he really do that though? So going back to the question, Do you think Bush knew? I think he knew alot more then the public and media did (AS IT SHOULD BE) and I think he did what he needed to do, givin' the circumstance and the times. Never was a war waged so carefully. How quickly we forget! You think Bush wanted a war? I think you are nuts! Remember who started it............all of us on earth (religon,politics,$,your sister) Remember WHO will finish it! ..................pray for peace! JC[/quote]

Don't forget the Imposed war, in which the US gave Saddam weapons to kill Iranians, in which over a million Iranians died. Does it justify Iranians going to war with the US and does 9-11 justify bombing Iraq? No... if you use hurt as a weapon, its just going to keep going back and fourth.

[jckinsman]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1259467' date='Apr 29 2007, 03:41 AM']Don't forget the Imposed war, in which the US gave Saddam weapons to kill Iranians, in which over a million Iranians died. Does it justify Iranians going to war with the US and does 9-11 justify bombing Iraq? No... if you use hurt as a weapon, its just going to keep going back and fourth.[/quote]
Your right! We should learn from the past to create a better future,..........It's just too bad we live in a world filled with humans! The question was do we think Bush knew, though! I thought that Bush knew alot more then we did! He went to war based on that. I don't think that he took that lightly. He had no control over the weapons that were sold to Saddam, years ago. He does however, have control over what happens now. Diplomacy does not work with terrorist. Terrorist are beyond hurt, they are filled with rage. Let that go and it will make 9-11 look like a tea party.We do have the right to defend ourselves. Do I like war ??? Not at all! Bush is in a horrible position, I pray for him! We all should! Who will be the one to stop all of this???? ..............Like I said above,God will!.......he can change things through our prayers! JC

Edited April 29, 2007 by jckinsman

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='jckinsman' post='1259578' date='Apr 29 2007, 10:20 AM']Your right! We should learn from the past to create a better future,..........It's just too bad we live in a world filled with humans! The question was do we think Bush knew, though! I thought that Bush knew alot more then we did! He went to war based on that. I don't think that he took that lightly. He had no control over the weapons that were sold to Saddam, years ago. He does however, have control over what happens now. Diplomacy does not work with terrorist. Terrorist are beyond hurt, they are filled with rage. Let that go and it will make 9-11 look like a tea party.We do have the right to defend ourselves. Do I like war ??? Not at all! Bush is in a horrible position, I pray for him! We all should! Who will be the one to stop all of this???? ..............Like I said above,God will!.......he can change things through our prayers! JC[/quote]

My mentioning of the imposed war was in responde to your quote:

[quote]Let's not forget! 9/11 is not a number, It was a horrible day[/quote]

...and the point is that our "horrible day" is nothing in comparision to "the horrible day" that we've given others. This is rarely ever thought of by americans, that maybe what americans has done, has caused the hurt of others and caused them to be anti-american but it's an idea that should be entertained because it's the truth. In this war [as in every other war] it just goes back and fourth. "you hurt me, killed by children so I'm going to hurt you and kill your children" and it goes back and fourth until someone has some self-control and turns the other cheek.

It's a fact that Americans expect Iran to turn the other cheek to the fact that Americans were an accomplice to the murder of millions of Iranians! Tell me, why should Iranians turn the other cheek, when Americans aren't ever willing to turn their other cheek or even appologize for the past?

Reza

[jckinsman]

Maybe, I am not making my self very clear. I think that we agree on what you said 100%! Turning the other cheek is everything, as christians, we should do. I know that! I can find it easy to turn my other cheek ,when I know where it will lead! The difference is, WHOLE contries have a much harder time doing so! Bush, for instance had lots of people helping him right? He made the choice based on all he knew as our leader,he chose to go to war. We as just average citizens, sit back in our chairs at night and think how best to handle this situation? We don't even have a clue the politics over war that goes on at the white house. Let alone a third world country! Turning the other cheek is not really choice #1 for them because of the pressure. Now maybe for Bush...If Mrs. B took a can of soda shook it and sprayed him down with it,he could turn the other cheek. As far as 9 11 goes, alot tougher~He can only deal with what he can have control over. This is a sad state of affairs! PRAY PRAY PRAY

[musturde]

I agree with Reza, America and Israel have this in common. We demand more respect for our country than we are willing to give to others. Sometimes we almost come off as bullies (as much of the world already portrays us as).

Edited May 3, 2007 by musturde

[Winchester]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1260921' date='Apr 30 2007, 05:30 PM']My mentioning of the imposed war was in responde to your quote:
...and the point is that our "horrible day" is nothing in comparision to "the horrible day" that we've given others. This is rarely ever thought of by americans, that maybe what americans has done, has caused the hurt of others and caused them to be anti-american but it's an idea that should be entertained because it's the truth. In this war [as in every other war] it just goes back and fourth. "you hurt me, killed by children so I'm going to hurt you and kill your children" and it goes back and fourth until someone has some self-control and turns the other cheek.

It's a fact that Americans expect Iran to turn the other cheek to the fact that Americans were an accomplice to the murder of millions of Iranians! Tell me, why should Iranians turn the other cheek, when Americans aren't ever willing to turn their other cheek or even appologize for the past?

Reza[/quote]
I just spent several minutes typing a reponse. I was logged in. I went to post and it told me to log in, and the only part of my post that survived was this vapid quote above.

SCREW INVISION POWER! THEY smell of elderberries!

sigh...

[dairygirl4u2c]

this poll is flawed, either or without the right options. bush and white house lied by stretching the connection between al quieda and iraq. this is evidenced by the fact no one ever defends it when presented with teh evience. a few deny they thought that they heard a connection was concocted, but when presented with teh evidence which is readily acceisble from media records, no one denies it concocts a connection that did not exist.

[Aloysius]

this poll was more about the question of whether Bush lied about WMDs or not. The thesis was basically: Sadam's scientists reported to Sadam that he had WMDs, the intelligence reflected this and thus caused Bush to believe that there were WMDs. If Sadam himself believed he was in possession of WMDs, then it'd be perfectly understandable for us to think he did based on the intelligence we received about what his scientists had told him.

imagine: secret CIA phone tap on Saddam Hussein

ring ring
Sadam: Hello?
Scientist: Hello Sadam, this is your favorite scientist speaking.
Sadam: Ahhh, hello there, have you produced some WMDs then?
Scientist: well....
Sadam: because you know if you don't come up with some I'll have to cut off your hands or something silly like that.
Scienist: ahhh... yeah... you see, we totally got it working. just name the time and place, we'll be able to nuke and/or chemically attack ppl.

whose fault would it be if a peice of intelligence like that phone call had led to an invasion of Iraq?

[gamesfanatic04]

The sad thing is we aren't even fighting a war. Oh we have soldiers in another country and occasionally something gets shot but this is no war. In one of our centuries last wars the US army bombed a 11th century monastery to kill 1 German sniper. In todays war all members of the peaceful religion of peaceful peace have to do is run into a mosque secure in the knowledge that the US will stop at least 20 feet from the door. Turn the cameras off and send the journalists home, let the military fight this war without civilians for 3 days and it will be over for good

[bonoducchi]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1309486' date='Jul 2 2007, 02:21 PM']this poll was more about the question of whether Bush lied about WMDs or not. The thesis was basically: Sadam's scientists reported to Sadam that he had WMDs, the intelligence reflected this and thus caused Bush to believe that there were WMDs. If Sadam himself believed he was in possession of WMDs, then it'd be perfectly understandable for us to think he did based on the intelligence we received about what his scientists had told him.

imagine: secret CIA phone tap on Saddam Hussein

ring ring
Sadam: Hello?
Scientist: Hello Sadam, this is your favorite scientist speaking.
Sadam: Ahhh, hello there, have you produced some WMDs then?
Scientist: well....
Sadam: because you know if you don't come up with some I'll have to cut off your hands or something silly like that.
Scienist: ahhh... yeah... you see, we totally got it working. just name the time and place, we'll be able to nuke and/or chemically attack ppl.

whose fault would it be if a peice of intelligence like that phone call had led to an invasion of Iraq?[/quote]

There is intelligence and there is [b]credible intelligence[/b]. You can't base a war on intercepting a scientist lying about his job productivity. You have to have credible physical evidence that "yes, there are" or 'no there are not." If we had a phone conversation on tape, then we should have been working harder to figure out [u]if it is reliable or not[/u]. We can't just be waiting with our guys in the planes and when we hear some low-level flunky say "yeah, we've got anthrax ready to go", send everyone in like bees on a popsicle. Even if scientists lied to Saddam, we still have the responsibility to reasonably confirm that intelligence before we rush in and destabilize the entire region for decades to come.