Donald Rumsfeld has acknowledged that there may be no WMD’s in Iraq.
How do you feel about that? How will america react to the news? In the UK there is a lot of concern about this. Blair used it as the overriding argument to get parliament on his side. He had a large rebellion over the war, but he managed to convince just enough of his own party that WMD’s did exist and were a concern to win. many of those who were persuaded are now feeling cheated. Although the US and UK haven’t given up looking yet, if Rumsfled is right then Blair was lying. Whether this will affect blair or not remains to be seen. Blair has a huge majority in parliament, and the opposition parties are pretty laughable at the moment. I think its doubtful that he will lose the next election. The election isn’t due for a year or two, and voters have a short memory.
He may face a rebellion within his own party though. A lot of labour MP’s seem very disenfranchised with the Blair regime. A few high profile ministers quit over his desicion to go to war, and I could see them coming back to mount a challenge his leadership.
So what about bush? Is this likely to affect the bush administration in any way? What are the chances of him getting re-elected? Do the american people consider this lying? Clinton nearly got impeached for lying about a blowjob. What are the chances to Bush being impeached for lying to get the US into a war?
So what about bush? Is this likely to affect the bush administration in any way? What are the chances of him getting re-elected? Do the american people consider this lying? Clinton nearly got impeached for lying about a blowjob. What are the chances to Bush being impeached for lying to get the US into a war?
Bush’ll get re-elected. See above.
That alone is a rather massive admittance of dishonesty, since they spent a year saying they were ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN the WMDs were there. Thousands and thousands of tons of sarin gas, anthrax, you name it. They had evidence, much of it secret, that proved it.
So what happened? Maybe they lied about all that secret, no-doubt-about-it evidence. Ya think?
I saw a report just this morning that two trailers found in Iraq are thought to have no other purpose than to be mobile biological weapons production facilities. This won’t be enough for some people. I don’t think there ever can be. If you led some of the strident lefties into a cave and showed them a barrel labeled “Anthrax! Do not open!”, in Arabic it wouldn’t be enough. They would say that the evil CIA planted it. Saddam himself could come around the corner and dance a jig around them singing “It’s true, It’s true! I had WMD’s intended for you!” and they wouldn’t believe it.
Cite to the report, Evil One? And while you’re at it, cite for the proposition that “the strident lefties” are as dim and stubborn as you make them out to be?
Dude, that’s exactly what they said about previous finds. “No other possible use?” - Prove it.
But then again, proof is exactly what this administration has failed to come up with, despite all their assertions.
And even if these mobile labs turn out to be the real deal, that still doesn’t excuse the fact that we were told Iraq currently had massive stockpiles of WMDs already existed, and that they posed a serious and immediate threat.
We were lied to, plain and simple. Now let’s just see how the people will react (although I fear that apathy is all too likely).
How about you give me a shout when that changes to “We have proof that they were mobile labs and they were being used”
I think that I’m the queen of England do that make me her?
Or any evidence WHATSOEVER about WOMD. You on the other hand seem to willing to buy any kind of shite that gets thrown at you. I’m perfectly willing to accept evidence and proof. You’re just accepting spin.
Gadarene, I saw the report just where you would expect me to…Fox News. As for the dim and stubborn cite, for many of us that is evident in thier everyday behavior. If you disagree with someone idologically, you are naturally going to think they are ignorant to some degree. I admit to this predjudice. Do you?
Bibliovore, “No other possible use?” - Prove it." They weren’t for making moonshine. Nor were they mobile cattle milking machines or ice cream trucks.
If WMD’s were hidden, they haven’t been found yet. If they were destroyed, evidence of thier existence may never be found. Saddam knew we were coming for months. There would be no better way to embarrass us than to remove evidence of the primary reason we ended his regime. I return to my original point. The more stridently you opposed the US action in Iraq, the less receptive you will be to proof about WMD’s. Some people still think that Clinton was an honorable man, for gods sake.
yojimbo, the CIA has stated that the trucks had no other purpose other than as mobile bioweapons labs. Next, I expect to hear you say that you can’t trust what the CIA tells you…thereby proving my point.
I loathe Bush as much as anybody, but we need more information.
Did Bush know it was a lie or was he being lied to? If Bush’s intelligence was inferior (no smart aleck interpretation intended) , then was it an honest mistake or a lie? One could conceive of a scenario where the military wants to start a war, so they deliberately provide false or misleading information to make Bush think there were weapons where none existed. Or one could conceive of a scenario where the intelligence community was simply reading the information wrong or the informants were lying and/or mistaken. I think it’s premature to speculate.
If Bush deliberately lied, then it’s game, set, match he must resign. If he was lied to, then heads need to roll. If it was simply interpreting data incorrectly or dishonest informants, then we need to clean house in the intelligence community. In any event, the argument that “we must go after THIS dictator because of these weapons …” falls apart.
We’ve seen this report before; it was cited by Shodan in another thread a week ago.
Of course, there was no evidence it had actually been used to produce WMDs. Furthermore, Iraqis did provide an alternate explanation - that it was used to produce hydrogen gas - that was possible, given the equipment. In a New York Times report on the trailers, it was reported that they had even found aluminum residue in the pressure vessels, which is consistent with the production of hydrogen. An unnamed source said “well maybe they planted that to fool us.” Yeah, right. You can’t make this stuff up.
Remember, the U.S. did not say they were going to war because the Iraqis had a couple of trailers theoretically capable of producing chemical weapons. They said Iraq DID have chemical weapons - tons and tons of them, thousands of weapons capable of being used. Where are they?
C’mon… I don’t think the second proposition needs a cite so much as a clarification, because, taken literally, its truth is self-evident. In a world where some people deny the moon landing, the Holocaust, and believe the Illuminati control all, there’s no doubt that SOME people would react as Evil One describes.
The relevant question is, would anyone other than the lunatic fringe react that way? I’m reasonably certain that the answer is no: confronted with reasonable evidence, most reasonable people would acknowledge that, yep, Saddam had WMD.
I, myself, am still waiting for that evidence, and am getting rather disturbed that the administration is beginning to float feelers along the lines of, “Well, the war was a good thing anyway.”
Evil,
That was NOT shown, or proved in any way, it was merely conjecture on the part of the CIA.
Please note: having these empty shells of vehicles with the general potential to possibly, at some future, undetermined date, maybe hold some biological weapons, does not, repeat NOT, in any way, represent any of the following:
The level of paranoia I see and hear from the US administration every night in interviews(mainly on the ever-so baised BBC, I admit) is getting really worrying. It is scary to see so many people who actually seem to believe their own lies. If only they could see themselves as the rest of the world can now see them.
If Bush was lied to, rather than being the liar himself, the lies didn’t come from the military, they came from Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and maybe even Cheney.