Granted this is great news. I definitely hope it's true that Iran is no longer pursuing nuclear weapons. That's an everybody wins case.
But why are you so quick to dismiss WMDs in Iraq pre-invasion, but so eager to embrace this new intelligence?
2007-12-03 16:49:47 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That should say 2003*
2007-12-03 16:52:42 · update #1
You are conveniently leaving out the fact that there were countless intelligence reports that contradicted the "fake intelligence" that Bush used to make his case for war with Iraq. The intel Bush used was literally HEARSAY, which originated from one man...an Iraqi exiled scientist who was peddling his story to more than one country for money and seeking asylum.
You don't go to war without verifying the intelligence. I suspect Bush and others knew the intel was faulty, because they deliberatley ignored all other contradicting intel. "Cherrypicking". Your also forgetting that Hans Blix repeatedly told Bush that Iraq had no WMD's. But Bush kept pressuring the UN to keep up the inspections knowing that eventually the inspectors would be tossed out, and he could point an accusing finger ..."see I told you they were hiding something".. Meanwhile Hans Blix was vilified politically and discredited by Bush rehtoric, until later we found everything he said to be true....which he wrote a book about.
The comparison of this report to the report that gave Bush an excuse for war is not a genuine comparison.
One report makes a case for war based on one man's lies, while the other report makes a case for peace based on actual physical inspection and IAEA monitoring.
2007-12-03 17:03:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
After the disastrous election results for Republicans in 2006, a clear repudiation of the neocon agenda, Bush has removed many of the neocons from his administration. The new intel community is more patriotic to the American people instead of Israel.
As for Iraq, Clinton had just destroyed Iraq's WMDs in 1998. And as for Iraq having nuclear weapons, didn't we all know that was ludicrous?
2007-12-03 16:57:50 · answer #2 · answered by CaesarLives 5 · 7⤊ 1⤋
I believe Israeli Mossad in this subject better than I do the administration. they could't point with us, lie, and canopy up starting to be a scandal on Benghazi-Gate, just to save their political skins. How can the yank human beings believe something that Joe Biden, President Obama, or Hillary ever tells us lower back?
2016-10-10 05:06:35 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Bush's OWN WEAPONS INSPECTOR (Remember David Kay??) has said that Iraq didn't have WMD...
Do you REALLY think that if there were any... they wouldn't be found BY NOW?? Do you REALLY think that if there were any, they wouldn't have been paraded under our noses as justification??
C'MON!!!
2007-12-03 18:04:02 · answer #4 · answered by Fretless 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's Clintons Fault!!!
Do I get a cookie?
(Actually I don't trust Iran at all... but I don't think Bush's plan of action will do anything except start another war...)
2007-12-03 16:53:29 · answer #5 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
because "This New Intelligence Report" was actually ready in 2005.
2007-12-03 17:21:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
because nobody is stupid enough to vote ahead of time, to give Bush the power to use force if necessary, again.
They already know he'll skip the "if necessary" part and go straight for the invasion.
2007-12-03 16:53:54 · answer #7 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
It's all about President Bush, they hate him!
Why? Liberalism, it's done been proven a [......] [.......] fill in the blanks.
Jeremy R.
2007-12-03 17:00:11 · answer #8 · answered by Jeremiah Johnson 7 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Whatever the most expedient route to surrender.
2007-12-03 16:54:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 6⤋