# Did the Bush Admin Make the Case that Iraq Presented an Imminent Threat? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 23, 2003, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124 "2003-10-23T14:59:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/21 "2003-10-23T17:02:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dinsdale \* > \*\* > So if you are looking for a cite to an admin quote that **Iraq IS an imminent threat…** , I fear you will not find it. Which means they were successful in creating some room for plausible deniability. > > But, I feel very strongly that they chose their words with the aim of creating the impression that Iraq presentlyy had or would shortly acquire significant WMD capability and, therefore, was an imminent danger. Same sort of way they seemed to intentionally conflate Saddam with 9/11. > > My impression was that their justification was primarily innuendo. I never saw the reason why at that particular time we had to take the extreme measure of pre-emptively invading a sovereign county. > > In this lawyer’s mind, the admin carefully used words in a manner designed to convey one impression, yet leaving themselves a technical out. > > Or have I completely missed your point? Are you asking something subtly different than what has been discussed at length here before? \*\* I’m not exactly asking " for a cite to an admin quote that **Iraq IS an imminent threat…** ," so much as i’m asking, did they make that case? It’s entirely possible, IMHO, to make a case for something w/o actually coming out and saying it. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/22 "2003-10-23T17:06:06Z")
I have seen this question debated ad naseum elsewhere. I am not sure of the point of the effort. Is it to say that Bush wasn’t wrong about Iraq because he never said it was an “imminent threat”? This gets at your second question: if he did not, why the urgency for war. The real question becomes: If the justification was not at the level of “imminent threat,” it must have been somewhat down the putative threat-severity scale. What was that point, in Bush’s mind or in his words? Clearly, we were in haste to go to war, and the reasoning employed was erroneous. So what is to be gained by those who wish to argue that the words “imminent threat” did not escape his lips? What would the threat category label be that would apply to this: > [@](#): > > Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. This regime has already used weapons of mass destruction against Iraq’s neighbors and against Iraq’s people. > > The regime has a history of reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a deep hatred of America and our friends. And it has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda. > > The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other. > > The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat. But we will do everything to defeat it. Instead of drifting along toward tragedy, we will set a course toward safety. Before the day of horror can come, before it is too late to act, this danger will be removed. From “Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation, The Cross Hall,” March 17. (Where he gave Saddam 48 hours to get out of town. Even though he was the Ace of Spades, apparently.) Clearly, he indicates that Iraq is a threat to the US, even in our own country. He does not use the word “imminent.” does it matter? Here is an interesting collection of quotes from the administration, assembled by PBS. [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/why/said.html](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/why/said.html) As an aside, here is an interesting lie I just noted from Bush in the address to the US: > [@](#): > > Yet, some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq. Who said they would veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/23 "2003-10-23T17:06:58Z")
Thanks for the link. Yeah, I was pretty certain they never said it in as many words. It was pretty obvious even as the speeches were being made. The weasel words were all over the place. Yet, an overwhelming percentage of the gullible public and both parties in both houses seemed to consider it convincing. Same way the admin never came out and flatly said Saddam was behind 9/11. But gee whiz. What could have possibly caused the public to draw that conclusion? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/24 "2003-10-23T17:10:58Z")
Does this count as making the case: > [@](#): > > \*\*[Press briefing May 7 2003\*\*](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030507-7.html) > > Q: > Well, **we went to war** , didn’t we, to find these – **because** we said that **these weapons were a direct and imminent threat to the United States? Isn’t that true?** > > MR. FLEISCHER: > \*\* Absolutely\*\*. One of the reasons that we went to war was because of their possession of weapons of mass destruction. And nothing has changed on that front at all. We said what we said because we meant it. We had the intelligence to report it. Secretary Powell said it. And I may point out to you, as you may know, there is a news conference at Department of Defense today at 2:00 p.m. to discuss one element in this. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/25 "2003-10-23T17:19:45Z")
I’m a little unclear on your terminology. When you ask if they “made the case,” are you asking if they TRIED TO ARGUE that Iraq was an imminent threat? Or are you asking if they succeeded in PROVING that Iraq was an imminent threat? I think they definitely TRIED to create the impression that something had to be done about Iraq RIGHT NOW. All the photos of the supposed chemical lab trucks, the supposed attempts to get materal from Niger, etc. At the same time, however, by choosing their words carefully, they left themselves wiggle room. I also think they woefully failed to PROVE such a case. My thoughts, after hearing of Powell’s evidence presented before the UN was - _“That’s it?”_ Also, I feel the word **imminent** is key, because I believe the admin avoided using that specific word because it did not have such proof, and that word has specific meanings and implications in various contexts. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/26 "2003-10-23T17:24:37Z")
Rumsfeld’s part of the Admin right? > [@](#): > > \*\*[Testimony Rumsfeld House Armed Services Committee regarding Iraq\*\*](http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2002/s20020918-secdef2.html) > > There are a number of terrorist states pursuing weapons of mass destruction – Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria to name but a few. But no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. > > **Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent** , that Saddam Hussein is at least five to seven years away from having nuclear weapons. **I would not be so certain.** > > But we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons. They’re simpler to deliver and even more readily transferred to terrorist networks, who could allow Iraq to deliver them without Iraq’s fingerprints. If you want an idea of the devastation Iraq could wreck on our country with a biological attack, consider the recent unclassified Dark Winter exercise conducted by Johns Hopkins University. > [@](#): > > \*\*[Secretary Rumsfeld Live Interview With Infinity CBS Radio Nov 14, 2002\*\*](http://www.dod.mil/transcripts/2002/t11152002_t1114rum.html) > > **Kroft** : Mr. Secretary, we’ve also, in addition to phone calls, we’ve gotten emails, and I want to read one to you. I’m the parent of an Army Reserve soldier who has already gone through his training and is on the next call up list to be deployed to the Persian Gulf area within the next few weeks, for a period of six months to two years. **I’m not yet convinced that Iraq is such an imminent threat to the United States** that it justifies having my son placed in harms way. If I were there in person, speaking to you, **what would you say to convince me?** > > **Rumsfeld** : Well, first, we’re grateful that your son is serving, and wants to serve. And I can’t help but recognize the feelings that a parent has. What would I say to you? Well, I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11th and ask yourself this question, was the attack that took place on September 11th an imminent threat the month before, or two months before, or three months before, or six months before? When did the attack on September 11th become an imminent threat? When was it sufficiently dangerous to our country that had we known about it that we could have stepped up and stopped it and saved 3,000 lives? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years, or a week, or a month, and if Saddam Hussein were to take his weapons of mass destruction and transfer them, either use them himself, or transfer them to the al Qaeda, and somehow the al Qaeda were to engage in an attack on the United States, or an attack on U.S. forces overseas, with a weapon of mass destruction you’re not talking about 300, or 3,000 people potentially being killed, but 30,000, or 100,000 of human beings. So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something, is a tough question. But if you think about it, it’s the nexus, the connection, the relationship between terrorist states and weapons of mass destruction with terrorist networks that has changed our lives, and changed the security environment in the world. And right now in the Congress the intelligence committees in the House and the Senate are working very hard, trying to connect the dots as to who knew what before September 11th, how might it have been stopped. Our task, your task as a mother, and as a citizen, as a voter, and my task, is to try to connect the dots before something happens, not afterwards. People say, well where’s the smoking gun? Well, we don’t want to see a smoking gun from a weapon of mass destruction. We have an obligation to try to defend the people of our country and the interests we have, and that is why the president went to the United Nations and sought a resolution, and received unanimous support to try to see if we can’t get a peaceful solution to the Iraqi problem. ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/27 "2003-10-23T17:28:09Z")
[Ari Fleischer (Dec. 5, 2002)](http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/05/sproject.irq.us.deadline/index.html): > [@](#): > > The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and vocally as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it. If Iraq “has weapons of mass destruction”, hasn’t the administration put the nuclear boogeyman under every person’s bed? It was left up to the gullible general public to decide whether or not Iraq having WMD constituted an imminent threat. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/28 "2003-10-23T17:35:56Z")
So are you arguing that the admin is disingenuous in their attempts at deniability? And is there any reason to think the American public will care? Very sad times to be an American. Of course, I am in a tiny minority for thinking so… ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/29 "2003-10-23T18:07:58Z")
**Dinsdale** , I’d have to say, “TRIED TO ARGUE that Iraq was an imminent threat,” is closest to what I was asking. IOW, is is fair to charge them w/ having sold the invasion on the premise of an imminent threat? Thanks for your help with terminology. ---
**Author:** ![telesis2001](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ce73a5/32.png) [@telesis2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/telesis2001)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/30 "2003-10-23T18:11:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SimonX \* > \*\*That’s pretty much it. > > There’s been noise that it did and that it didn’t. > If it did, when, how and where?\*\* This point has been made. Now… > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SimonX \* > \*\*If it didn’t. Whence the urgency to invade Iraq? > > I’m eager to see some Doper discourse. \*\* Let’s continue… ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/31 "2003-10-23T19:46:53Z")
Whence the urgency? The window of opportunity was there but finite, following 9/11 and with public acceptance readily obtainable. Why do it at all? PNAC had as members, or at least inspirees, the key decisionmakers. Toss in th’awl bidness and Saddam’s being an ass and you’re there. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/32 "2003-10-23T20:06:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by telesis2001 \* > \*\* > This point has been made. Now… > \*\* Has it? I suspect that what’s been presented so far isn’t compelling to many. Maybe this evening… > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by telesis2001 \* > \*\* > Let’s continue… > \*\* ? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/33 "2003-10-23T21:34:38Z")
Splendid idea for a thread, **Simon**. Granted, I think the issue of whether or not the Bushiviks ever claimed an “imminent” threat is little more than an interesting excercise, I do like the idea of the Boards as a place for Google-hounds to gather and get the scent before loping off into cyberspace (One almost pictures The Smoking Cite, stumbling in panic and desperation through the quagmire while the hounds baying draws ever nearer…) Same thing is happening at Media Whores and Talking Points Memo, though prob the Horse is a reflection of TP. They have a contest going for the best cite on this point. Winner gets a T-shirt or something! Let’s win this one, Leering Lefties! The SDMB has some of the best Google athletes and Nexis geeks in the world! Think of the fame! The smug lording it over! The gloating! May I assume there would be no objection if I forwarded such a winner onward? With due credit, of course. Smithers! Release the hounds! ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/34 "2003-10-23T21:45:36Z")
I see it’s time for me to click the “Show Signature” box again. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2003, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/35 "2003-10-23T22:34:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\* > Let’s win this one, Leering Lefties! > \*\* Ummm… I’m not a leftie. There’re many righties who were opposed to the invasion and who think that politicians lie. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\* > Same thing is happening at Media Whores and Talking Points Memo, though prob the Horse is a reflection of TP. They have a contest going for the best cite on this point. Winner gets a T-shirt or something! > \*\* Where’s this? Do they have the ones I’ve already provided? What about this one? > [@](#): > > \*\*[Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer January 2003\*\*](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030130-34.html) > > Q Some of those who have been reluctant to go along with us have, in essence, asked the question, **what’s the urgency, what is a sign that this is an imminent, like, immediate threat**? > > MR. FLEISCHER: And in that point what the President would tell you is that, one, Saddam Hussein has committed to giving up the weapons of mass destruction, and if the United Nations is to have a meaningful place in our world, the United Nations resolutions vis-a-vis Iraq to give up the weapons of mass destruction must be enforced. Otherwise, the world can never rest easy because he’ll continue to have them. > > Two, September 11th changed everything for the United States and, indeed, for this President. While the notion of containment may previously have made some sense prior to September 11th, September 11th changed everything because it shows that we are indeed a vulnerable country, that threats to us cannot be contained. As the President said in his State of the Union speech, imagine if any of the hijackers on September 11th had not only driven their planes into buildings, but were armed with a vial, a canister, a crate of a biological or a chemical weapon. The damage done to our country would have been massive. The risk remains and the risk is nowhere greater than under Saddam Hussein. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/36 "2003-10-24T00:14:29Z")
[http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/](http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/) Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall. No one can claim to be well informed without keeping up with Ol’ Josh. [http://www.mediawhoresonline.com/](http://www.mediawhoresonline.com/) A scurrillous, cantankerous, and entirely partisan Leftist assault on…well, you know. Not at all reputable, of course. They specialize in harpooning Bushivik apologists in the Media. Critiques: **Minty** , yours speaks to the avalanche of horseshit as regards the existence of WMD’s. While this is a splendid example of bald-faced mendacity, it doesn’t really speak to the _imminent_ threat of the use of non-existent weapons. **Simon** : You don’t catch a slippery critter like Ol’ Ari that easy, nosireeBob. His response could be massaged to represent a sort of _non_-response: while his questioner was engaged with the issue of _immediacy_ of the threat, Ari responded with the presumed _consequences_ of the threat. Would the Bushiviks stoop to such shameless niggling and parsing? Bet me. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/37 "2003-10-24T01:35:02Z")
From: [http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/sasia/afghan/text2003/0129dod.htm](http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/sasia/afghan/text2003/0129dod.htm) > [@](#): > > The United States Department of Defense > DoD News Briefing > Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld > Wednesday, January 29, 2003 – 2:18 p.m. EST > > Q: Thank you. Do you believe Iraq represents an imminent threat to the United States? > > Rumsfeld: You know, that is a question that is coming up quite a bit, and it’s an important question. > > Clearly, it’s been — what’s been going on there has been going on in large measure for some 12 years. > > … > > Now, at what moment was the threat to — for September 11th imminent? Was it imminent a week before, a month before, a year before, an hour before? Was it imminent before you could — while you could still stop it, or was it imminent only after it started and you couldn’t stop it, or you could stop one of the three planes instead of two or all three? I was really hoping for some more vigorous debunking of these quotes. I guess it’s apologista night off? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/38 "2003-10-24T05:34:49Z")
What those quotes say is basically, “We don’t know”. And Bush’s SOTU speech debunks anything that might have been said off the cuff before. I don’t know about you, but I would consider a SOTU statement more significant as a statement of administration policy than an off-the-cuff remark in an interview. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/39 "2003-10-24T06:40:24Z")
That’s the same SOTU speech with the bogus Niger yellowcake uranium bullstuff reference, ainnit? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124/40 "2003-10-24T07:18:35Z")
Nope. Niger is never mentioned in the SOTU. More intentional lying about Bush’s statements by those who want to smear him. Isn’t it ironic that so many liars are trying to get people to think that Bush lied? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-the-bush-admin-make-the-case-that-iraq-presented-an-imminent-threat/209124.md?page=3)