Did Bush lie about having proof of weapons of mass destructions in Iraq or not?

Question

I remember hearing about "yellow cake uranium" or something like that which I believe was proven to be untrue.
I know we are there now but really, did we have to start a war with Iraq over weapons of mass destructions or not?

Answer 1

Yes Bush knowing lied about Iraq having WMD. They had the info that the report linking Saddam buying yellow cake uranium from Africa was absolutely and completely false. Why do most people not understand that is what the Scooter Libby trial was really all about.
-rumors that Saddam has purchased the uranium
-Cheney asks the CIA to check it out
-CIA sends Wilson and he finds the rumors to be false
-Wilson files the report with the CIA who in turn gives it to Cheney
-Bush annouces in his speech to sell the war that the rumor is actually true and that 'the smoking gun could be mushroom cloud'
-Wilson writes the article in the Washington Post
-Bush and Cheney are pissed because their lie is exposed
-Cheney, with Bush authority, 'leak' Plames name as a CIA agent (Plame is Wilson's wife) and they direct Libby, Armitrage, and Rowe to get the word out to their sources
-Libby is the fall guy when they realize their ploy will not work

Answer 2

The CIA and NSA told him they were there. These are two of the most reliable intelligence agencies in the world. The assumption is they did their homework. Additionally, the Brits, the French, the Israelis, and virtually every Western power believed Iraq had WMD. The disagreement was over what to do about it. So, no Bush didn't lie. He passed on incorrect information. If I tell you a lie that you believe and you tell someone else, did you lie?

The yellow cake uranium was a minor side issue that was mentioned as a footnote to the UN. It had almost no impact on whether or not we invaded Iraq (contrary to what the left will say)

If Saddam really had WMD, as the Western world believed, then there was a risk that he would make them available to al-Qaida or some other terrorist group to be used against America or our allies. It was felt by the administration that it would be better to mount a pre-emptive strike rather than respond to a WMD attack on American soil. That is why we invaded Iraq. Not to mention the fact that he was in violation of 17 UN resolutions. The rest is history.

Answer 3

None of us can say that Bush lied with any certainity, because he can always use the excuse that his information was faulty, which he's already done.

In my opinion, yes he lied then and is still lying today.

The intelligence reports we used to initially commit to war in Iraq, namely information from a shady character identified only as "Source One" who was supposed to be an insider in the Iraqi Nuclear Program, has all been proven false many times over. In addition, upon later review, it was found to be not only false, but greatly exaggerated upon, because the sparse information contained in the "reports" from Source One were no more adequate than speculation.

Then there's the fact that, 4 years after the war began, we have blown the country to pieces and have not found a single piece of equipment that doesn't pre-date Desert Storm. Any and all equipment we have found were at least ten to twelve years out of service and decommisioned by age and lack of upkeep.

Interestingly enough, PNAC (Project for a New American Century) did, in fact, call for a "necessary crisis" in the Middle East in order to expand America's global influence and power.

Regardless, the paper hurricane t that makes up our intelligence trail (just the one we even know about, mind you) is so cross-filed and falsified that simply sorting it all would be a literal act of congress. Using said "evidence" to convict or prosecute any high-ranking individual would almost undoubtedly fail, as such people have massive influence and would either squash it before it began in earnest, or find a scapegoat.

Answer 4

Yes, he did lie. When Bush gave his "State of the Union Address", in 2002, they knew that there were no WMD's in Iraq.

If you had followed Scooter Libby's trial, you would know that their outing of the CIA agent (Valerie Plame) was in retaliation of Joe Wilson's recent trip to Africa, discounting the "yellow cake theory", that Saddam was making WMD's. It is believed that Libby lied to protect VP Cheney. It has been proven that this adm wanted to go to war in Iraq & manipulated the intelligence to put us there. BUSTED.

Do a search on "The Downing Street Memo". Very interesting.

Answer 5

on condition that there have been no WMDs, even although Rummy et al claimed to have customary the place they have been located, then their next trump card grew to become into terrorism. the distinctive issues the best will cite are shells that were uncovered to the climate and had a) been degraded and hence ineffective or b) were under UN seal which the U. S. infantrymen broke open of their hunt for those "humongous" WMD piles they have been to seek for. subject, till we invaded Iraq there grew to become into no Al Qaeda. If we proceed to apply that premise, while are we going to invade the Sudan, the place Al Qaeda has a meant coaching floor, or Pakistan the place there is extensive help and coaching grounds for Al Qaeda- a now becoming venture because of the fact the protection rigidity government isn't as good because it grew to become into before, or Indonesia the record can pass on and on. Pre-emptive wars on any united states of america is a contravention of the UN shape which the U. S. signed. in my opinion, i do no longer understand if he lied yet while he did no longer then he grew to become into an entire ignoramus and stupid and did no longer hardship to verify what grew to become into somewhat occurring and why the thumbscrews have been utilized by making use of Cheney, Wolfie, Rummy etc on the push to conflict. If he did no longer lie, he did no longer desire to appreciate the certainty and did no longer desire to ask the no longer ordinary questions- a sickness that's working rampant interior the Republican social gathering, regrettably

Answer 6

This is SOOO FREAKING OLD! GIVE IT UP ALREADY.
If someone tells you something that is supposed to be true, and you tell someone else, then they find out that what you said was incorrect, are YOU a liar?
By the way, Saddam used WMD on his own people. You really think he kept them lying around when the inspectors came? You do know that Russian MiG's were found buried in the sand?

Answer 7

We went to war to enforce the cease fire after the Gulf War.

Saddam tried and failed to get yellow cake from Niger.

You can hear Hillary state right here as to why we should go to war with Iraq.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8

Start about 6 minutes in.

Answer 8

Saddam admitted having and using weapons of mass destruction (thousands of Kurds killed).

The WMDs were taken to Syria before the USA invaded.

Answer 9

No, Saddam did have uranium at one point; its a proven fact. WMD, no; but all intelligence from the UN, US, and other countries led to him having WMD. So if everyone thought he had them, and Bush thought they did...Doesnt really make him a liar.

Answer 10

He did not; the weapons were known to be there because they had been used. It is not credible to suppose that Saddam destroyed them in secret when he was obliged to do so in public. So, what happened to them? They got moved to Syria starting in June 2002.