Did the Bush Admin Make the Case that Iraq Presented an Imminent Threat?

Great Debates
61

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans – this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)

62

Let’s see now, shadowy terrorist networks. Nope. Lethal viruses. Nope. Chemical agents. Nope. But he was definitely not claiming the “threat” was imminent. Well, thats a big relief, I was beginning to suspect that the Bushiviks weren’t being entirely candid and forthcoming.

63

So, this is it. This is the statement that specifically states that Iraq is not an imminent threat. Then there is hope. If this is the type of (semantical) argument that this Administration is going to hang it’s hopes of re-election on, then even the dullest of sheep should be able to see through it.

64

The administration isn’t hanging their hats on this. They are hanging it on the economy and the rebuilding of Iraq and Afghanistan.

If Iraq proves to be a smashing success, the whole buildup to war becomes moot. People don’t look to point fingers after successful operations. It’s only happening now because things haven’t gone as planned.

65

On the subject of just how “imminent” the nuclear threat was, I recommend the article in today’s Washington Post, available through MSNBC without registration.

In short, the “threat” consisted of the buried, 12-year-old documents of one nuclear researcher. There were certainly no nuclear weapons, nor was there even a “program” aimed at producing them. And judging by the Administration’s post-invasion actions (almost no one searching for nuke stuff, no one seizing any of the much-vaunted “aluminum tubes,” no one eager to talk to the Iraqi nuclear scientists), they knew damn well there was nothing there.

66

Has the Bush Admin said anything re their presentation of the relative imminence of the threat to the US from Iraq? Or has this been entirely a pundit thing?

Has anyone in the Bush admin done anything to disabuse the public of the notion that the Bush Admin presented the threat to the US from Iraq as imminent?
Or have they been content to let the impression exist?

67

They’re content to not say anything about it and hope we forget the issue.

68

“It’s only happening now because things haven’t gone as planned.”

Sorry, but for this to be true, a plan would have been needed in the first place.

69

As long as we’ve rehabilitated this thread, here’s something on-topic.

It’s official: Report says Iraq didn’t have WMD

Interestingly, this report seems to be on all the major news websites…except Fox. Hmmm.

70

Gotta love how carefully Powell words his “rebuttal”

"He said there was a “solid case” from U.N. inspectors and other officials that the Saddam Hussein regime “was a danger we had to worry about.” "

Yep. Not a nice man, Saddam. Bears keeping an eye on.

"“What he was waiting to do is see if he could break the will of the international community, get rid of any potential for future inspections and get back to his intentions, which were to have weapons of mass destruction.” "

Wherein Mr. Powell demonstrates his capacity for clairovoyance.

"“Where the debate is, is why haven’t we found huge stockpiles and why haven’t we found large caches of these weapons? Let’s let the Iraqi Survey Group complete its work.” "

[Bugs] It is to laugh!**

“The Bush administration has quietly withdrawn from Iraq a 400-member military team whose job was to scour the country for military equipment, according to senior government officials.”

[znip]

“A separate military team that specializes in disposing of chemical and biological weapons remains part of the 1,400-member Iraq Survey Group, which has been searching Iraq for more that seven months at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. But that team is “still waiting for something to dispose of,” said a survey group member.”
“I have not seen smoking gun concrete evidence about the connection, but I think the possibility of some connections did exist and was prudent to consider them at the time that we did.” "

Niether have we, oddly enough. Neither has anyone, for that matter. And yes, carefully phrased to be entirely true: so long as a connection is not impossible, then “the possibility of some connectons did exist”.

But my favorite, the grace note that sets it all off “prudent to consider them”. “Prudent”.

No, Mr. Powell, prudent is a stitch in time saves nine. Prudent is putting a little money aside for a rainy day. “Prudent” applies to a full scale military invasion of a soveriegn nation in much the same way as “modest” would.

71

What really disturbs me is that a man whom I thought was honorable (Powell) hasn’t resigned from his position in this thoroughly mendacious administration yet.

72

Boy, I am with you on that. Trouble is, when I think about why I had such an excellent opinion of Powell, I can’t really tell you why. I remember being rather disturbed about him early on, when reports surfaced that he had, at one point, some involvement with the investigation of the My Lai massacre. Given the circumstances, its hard not to harbor the impression that not enough investigation was done.

Of course, if he suddenly decides to come clean about the whole thing and reclaim his honor, you’ll be able to tell by the number of cardiac teams headed to Karl Rove’s office.

Boy, wouldn’t you love to see them spin on that sumbitch!

73

Wrong

74

By the way, whatever happened to the big news about weapons that David Kay was to spring in September?

The argument that GW never actually said the threat was iminent is a mere quibble. The impression was certainly given that action had to be taken or else. I can think of no other justification for a preemptive war.

And in my opinion even that is borderline.

I claimed at one time that Iraq didn’t come up until after the WTC attacks. Minty Green correctly pointed out that GW, et. al. had been calling Saddam a menacing figure to the US for a long time. So, at the first available excuse, no matter how thin, GW, Wolfie, Rummy, Perle, etc. struck. I think it is just that simple. My real anger is at a Congress that went along like lapdogs. If, as Clarence Page said on The News Hour, the Democratic party were still alive it might not have happened.

75

here’s the report

http://www.ceip.org/files/pdf/Iraq3FullText.pdf

76

Well, it wasn’t when I wrote my post. The story appeared sometime later.

And, to be fair, Fox still isn’t reporting on Carnegie’s WMD report, they’re reporting on Powell attacking it – without more than brief mention of what has Colin so upset.

77

Well since so many are bashing adaher already I won’t bother… after all discussing the imminence or not of weapons that didn’t exist at all and the govt. lied about them to begin with seems silly enough.

When Powell went to the UN to give the "proof" that was lacking to convince other nations, that was a major dissapointment to me. At that moment I thought the multi billion satelites and spy stuff would give Powell very relevant stuff to prove the US case... and what did he show us ? A few inconclusive phone taps and some fotos of trucks. 

 Come on. Going to War for so little ? Saddam is out ? That is good... but its FUCKING WAR ! Not a police action... not a minor military excercise. The US public was asking for blood and a convenient target was given. 

 Say all you want Adaher. There was no threat, imminent or not. Urgency didn't exist and terrorism wasn't an issue there. You might think final results count more... but that is only electoraly. Stupid voters decide who governs... not what is right.
78

Wrong again.

That article also provides a link to the actual report.

79

So clearly it’s not unusual to’ve gotten the impression that we had to act with great urgency before all actions, all words, and all recriminations would be too late.
Has the Bush Admin said anything re their presentation of the relative imminence of the threat to the US from Iraq? Or has this been entirely a pundit thing?

Has anyone in the Bush admin done anything to disabuse the public of the notion that the Bush Admin presented the threat to the US from Iraq as imminent?
Or have they been content to let the impression exist?

A nickel per for whoever can answer these questions well.

80

No. Yes. No. Yes. Put it in the collection plate, next time you’re in church. Jesus needs bread, baby.