Did congress REALLY vote to go to war based on the same intelligence that Bush had?

Question

Perhaps it was based on the same intelligence that Bush had, but not based on the same intelligence that Bush had access to. He received a memo giving him a time, a place, and a method to be used. He didn't read it. Isn't it fair to say that his lack of concern BLOCKED congress from having access to the same intelligence? Perhaps they would have voted differently if they had that information...

sorry, dirty what? LMAO!

got it, dirty. No no no no, the congress didn't vote based on the same information...afterall, that is what my question was. Thanks for paying attention.

Answer 1

Apparently a couple of you knuckleheads have to be reminded that Clinton did do something about Saddam. He agreed to allow the UN inspectors to do their jobs. No muss, no fuss. And it seemed to have worked because they've yet to find any WMDs.
Good job, Bill. Thanks for not getting our troops killed in a fabricated war.
The fact is the neocons have wanted to go back into Iraq since the first time we left Iraq. They were just looking for an excuse, and they were going to manipulate the intel (as well as the American people) in order to get what they wanted. It had nothing to do with al-Quaeda or WMDs. They had this bonehead idea that could magically bring democracy to a country, to a region, that's never had any experience at it. Or even ever heard the word before. Not out of the kindness of their heart, but in order to create a new ally in an are of the world where if very few. A friend created at gunpoint.
I can't tell if they were incredibly naive, or monumentally arrogant. Probably a combination of both.

Answer 2

Congress was conned by the White House, as most of the US citizens and people in the western world, to believe in a "clear and present danger", and therefore they acted like rabbits and voted to dig more holes.
This gave the Bush administration the power and the political and military tools to start WW III, exactly what they had in mind in the first place.
I wonder how long it will take until the people and their politicians wake up and see things the way they are. And hopefully it will not be too late then to save the planet.

Answer 3

no no no no. first of all this is a congressional war, not bushes war. the congress always has to vote on whether or not we go to war. the Intel that was used was non partisan. it pre existed GWB. Saddam had WMDs in the 90's, Clinton ignored the warnings from the CIA and other Intel groups. you know who else thought the war was a good idea before we invaded? both Clinton's, Kerry, gore, Edwards, the whole lot.
you need to learn about how our system works here you dumb *****.

Answer 4

They surely had get properly of entry to to it and they could't now say that they did not get it. basically because they chosen now to not coach themselves would not relieve them of the criminal duty for vote casting for the conflict. there became no doubt that the Bushies were pushing for conflict with Iraq as some distance back as 1992. In 1998, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and others desirous about PNAC despatched an open letter to President Clinton calling for conflict with Iraq. Why were we supprised in 2001 at the same time as they were given into ability and then went to conflict? shouldn't the Dems have wondered their "intelligence" on the time.

Answer 5

Congress did not have the same intel as the White House. The White House was able to cherry pick what information they wanted to spin on congress and everyone who follows politics knows this.

Answer 6

Sorry but where is your NONPARTISAN evidence that they didn't have the same information?

They had (basically) all the info under Clinton. Who had the oppertunity to stop all of this then, who had the oppertunity to stop the Talliban, who basically was only concerned with getting sex.

Answer 7

bush said it during the debate that congree had the same imfo that he had,so is bush lying

Answer 8

Yes.

Next question.