Did Bush DICIDE to Lie about WMD's or just get bad info?

Question

from his incompetaent gop staff

dont you think its sick that BUSH BLAMES
the troops and the CIA for his WMD LIES

Answer 1

He lied.

.

Answer 2

quite usually undesirable recommendations. no longer all inspite of the truth that. Bush does could take area of the bame alongside with Blair and especialy Clinton. The UN ad its human beings were also very incorrect contained in the way they dealt with issues. It comes right down to such truly some blundres from such truly some diverse places. the reality became very confusing to discover. One genuine aspect became an Iraqi defector from the authorities there claiming to understand the position and what the WMDs. It became shown later after each little thing were given snarled that he became particularly a plant by technique of the samam secret service. such truly some mistakes made and nonetheless are being made. Now the democrats are properly on the way of creating huge mistakes themselves.

Answer 3

I can't believe I'm still reading this type of crapola. Did you miss those thousands of posts proving that EVERYONE believed in Iraq's WMDs, even before Bush was elected? You missed the statements from Clinton and Kerry and Berger and Pelosi and all of them stating that Iraq had WMDs and that something must be done. Did you just arrive on this planet? There's nothing incompetant about the Staff, Bush's or Clinton's. They all reported the same thing. The only incompetant people are those who keep insisting that the President lied.

Answer 4

He did not lie.
The real reason for the war was 12 years of Saddam ignoring 17 UN Security Council resolutions and 30 statements from the President of the UN Security Council regarding Saddam Hussein's continued violations of UNSCRs. The UN might as well be disbanded for becoming as impotent as the League of Nations.
If you are on a witch hunt, here she is singing a different tune than she is today http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgB1KiOpbRc&mode=related&search=

Answer 5

He lied. Going after Saddam was on his own personal agenda. He probably hoped and figured he'd find some form of wmd so that he could justify his war. Instead it blew up in his face. We were attacked by terrorists, this is true. Instead of spending the time, money, energy and resources on finding the terrorists, he went ahead pushing his own agenda. He took advantage of how angry and scared the american public was after the 9/11 attacks. I believe we are less safe today

Answer 6

Bthe Clinton's reported this , the Blair's m6, even the french band Germans believe it. even Saddam hinted he had them. all the intelligences pointed to it. he did gas the curds. everyone forgets.
when the grounds force got there, they worried about chemical
attacks . that was the reason they had worn the special suits.
if bush lied the everyone one else lied. pres. Clinton said he was a threat before 911. what is happening, you keep saying Bush lied , Bush lied. then it becomes a fact.. even thought it's false.

Answer 7

I'm not a Bush fan, but I don't believe that he realized what a lie it would all turn out to be. I think he got bad info, and instead of waiting for confirmation, he jumped into the war...against so many opposing opinions. At this point, I think he would score major points if he owned up to that...

Answer 8

I do not think he wanted to lie. It was basically driven by rubbish CIA gave him as Intelligence. Nevetheless, it was not smart of him to decide to invade, because the whole of the world were screaming there are no WMDs and not to invade.

After the invasion, after finding there are no WMDs, he had to stick to his original statements, Or else, he would have to admit CIA was wrong and he was wrong to invade. This probably would have cost him his job. I think thats why he keeps insisting he has been right.

Answer 9

There's an article in the washington post all about bush's lie. Let me find it...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/12/AR2005051201857.html

Seven months before the invasion of Iraq, the head of British foreign intelligence reported to Prime Minister Tony Blair that President Bush wanted to topple Saddam Hussein by military action and warned that in Washington intelligence was "being fixed around the policy," according to notes of a July 23, 2002, meeting with Blair at No. 10 Downing Street.

...

"Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD [weapons of mass destruction]. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

Answer 10

First, at this point I think everyone knows that he has never made a decision for himself in his entire life. Second, the info was bad because the information gatherers were being pressured to find or at least interpret something to suit the administrations agenda.

Answer 11

I thought he just got bad intel, but Wilson obviously had doubts about the yellowcake claim, and he still chose to use it in the State of the Union.