What are you expecting from me on Thanksgiving

There’s one point that’s continually bothered me, that I haven’t seen addressed. I’d particularly like it if Scylla, the one showing the most reflective attitude here, did so:

Presumably, we’re in a better position now to find WMDs than we ever were. We have physical control of the country, and there’s no dictator trying to play cat and mouse, among other things.

Yet, we’ve found nothing so far, and the inspectors often mention how difficult it will be to search even under these conditions. After all, it’s a large country, and they’re only a limited, if large, body of inspectors, and the things they’re looking for could be as small as a bundle of papers.

Given that, how is it at all possible that the Bush administration could know with enough certainty before the invasion that there were WMDs in Iraq? Even under optimal conditions, it’s very difficult; what possible certainty could the Bush administration have had from iffy intelligence reports, no matter how much the Office of Special Plans spun the data?

When I think about this, the scale of the gamble the Bush administration took boggles me.

Re: the centrifuge in the garden. The reason I give it very little credence as a piece of a program to develop WMDs is that it was buried in a garden from the time of the first Gulf War. Crucial piece that it is, the fact that it’s lain undisturbed for more than a decade is evidence against Iraq having an active WMD program.

[Overheard at Denny’s]Hey y’all, I know Saddam had some bad ass weapons, but why ain’t none of the militia used 'em?[OaD]

Yeah, and a whopping $600 million dollars.

More on the trailer issue- guess who was the last person to give up on those (just like he was the last person to give up on Iraqi 9-11 ties and had to be publically corrected by the President)- that right Dick Cheney. More:

I don’t know Scylla, Kay does seem to take every inference in favor of this could, might, maybe, sort of, may have intended approach. I would say he was unbiased in general, however in comparison to someone like Cheney, Rumsfled some of the others that may have dragged Bush down the garden path on Iraq- he does seem to be.

Also- still have not scene any follow up on that “story” you posted. You may want to stick to primary sources like CNN or even Fox News Channel for links regarding possible news.

Other details:

Compared to what Bush claimed:

Perhaps we need to take a look at the latest report from David Kaye, who delivered this interim report on the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) before a congressional panel on Oct. 2.

The report is surprisingly readable, and I would recommend you take a look at it. But here are a few paragraph about it.

First, the report goes into problems the inspectors have faced:

Nevertheless, they have found evidence of several ongoing WMD program.

There is also extensive evidence that the Iraqis destroyed evidence of the program as the U.S. forces advanced on Baghdad:

Here’s one conclusion about the existence of biological programs:

As for the chemical weapons program, there’s a ton of evidence that has to be sifted through:

And by all accounts, Saddam wanted to continue developing chemical weapons, such as mustard gas:

As for nuclear weapons, the first Gulf War and subsequent sanctions may have severely crippled Iraq’s program, but Saddam still wanted nukes:

That’s just the tip of the iceburg. The report is in English and easy to read. It’s on the Web and available to everyone.

Now, take a look at how the New York Times delivered the news:

No Illicit Arms Found in Iraq, U.S. Inspector Tells Congress

WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 — The government’s chief weapons inspector in Iraq told Congress on Thursday that his team had failed to find illegal weapons after three months of scouring the country, but he said the group had discovered some evidence of Saddam Hussein’s intent to develop such weapons and even signs that Baghdad had retained some capacity to do so.

(Not surprisingly, senators who were expecting Bush to produce barrels of the stuff were not happy)

One wonders, after reading the report, if they’re fools, morons, or politicians who understand that, once this report is filtered through the media, that they know exactly how it will appear:

Let’s summarize: Despite 12 years of sanctions, Saddam Hussein kept together his programs to build nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. He kept the plans and whatever materials he could. He organized resistence to numerous United Nations resolutions – hear that multlaterialists HE DEFIED UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTIONS – to dismantle these programs.

His intentions are clear: hide as much as possible, deny everything, and when the heat was off, when the sanctions were lifted, start rebuilding.

Can you deny that he intended to rebuild his stocks of biological weapons? Do you believe that, if the sanctions were suddenly lifted, he was going to say, "We’re free. Burn the documents, Ali! We don’t need these programs? Who needs mustard gas? Who needs Sarin?

And if you truly believe that nations should act in accordance with United Nations resolutions, and a country subscribing to those resolutions defies the U.N., what do you think should happen next? Should the U.N. enforce those resolutions? Or should there be another 12 years of sanctions?

The evidence is there that these programs existed in Iraq. Don’t let your hatred of Bush blind you to them.

Invade Israel.

Wow I came to post the first instance on the official Spin Control- but I see someone beat me too it. But even Bush didn’t try to strech the results like you did- bravo! I see you love the bold font- in your honor I will use some to help refute your wishful thinking.

Wow, only one strong finding- they wanted to extend the range of their missles. No weapons, no real programs, on possible intend, and a few dual use products and one vial of botulism bacteria. Gee you could get that with a few dented cans. Are they WMD’s too? In any event pesch, thanks for the laugh. Nothing but excuses, major qualifers, little piles of ashes, weather balloon equipment, and destoyed computer equipment. That’s not what Bush, Cheney and Powell promised us now is it?

Love the blame the media attempt- classic! See they keep reports things that make Bush look bad- it’s a conspiracy!!

:rolleyes:

And the black helicopters forced me to post those typos too.

Well anyway, here is the official Bush line. Unsurprisingly, he is taking the glass is half-full approach. Still, you have to think that maybe Cheney and his pro-invasion chickenhawk buddies might not be getting a Christmas card from the Bush’s this year.

Down to 41 percent. Glug, glug, glug.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=1&u=/nm/20031003/ts_nm/iraq_bush_dc_5

pesch, the major problem I have with your post is that everything is being viewed based on the hypothesis that Saddam had an active WMD program. I mean, look at your post. Okay, people burning notebooks and ruining hard drives is certainly indicative of some suspicious activity. But it is certainly NOT indicative of some suspicious activity involving WMDs unless you’re already working under that hypothesis.

Try it this way. Suppose the cops start banging on my door, because they got an anonymous tip that I’ve got a pound of cocaine in my basement. I’m on the toilet when they start banging, so it takes me a minute to get to them. I let them in, they serve their warrant and lo and behold, I don’t have any cocaine in my basement. But they’re pretty convinced that I do indeed have the coke. So they conclude that the two minutes it took me to get the door was the time I took to flush my drugs. Hell, they might have even heard a flush! Case closed. I get arrested.

That’s ridiculous! Burning notebooks is certainly fishy, but who’s to say that they weren’t burning records of plans to invade Saudi Arabia? Nude photos of Saddam? Detailed records of Uday and Qusay’s shenanigans? A list of moms that Saddam would like to fuck? You don’t know, and asserting that a pile of ash is evidence of a WMD program is asinine to the highest degree.

y’all are missing the important detail/bolding of that post. it was all “blah blah blah wmd programs” and “blah blah blah Saddam wanted” PLease compare and contrast to Bush’s speeches wherein he spoke of WMD in existence, tons and tons of chemicals/biological etc etc etc. a wmd “program” can be a notebook w/schematics in it, a buried trailer, a scientist w/a degree in biological engineering.

it simply was not what was asserted to have been in existence.

I am also struck by the remark from the REpublican senator who suggested that we take a ‘wait and see’ approach. Seems to me that I heard those same words several months ago from t’other side and they were ignored.

I think that’s also what the majority of Americans were expecting to find right after the war. Oh yeah, and ties to 9/11.

And we had to defy the U.N. to enforce the U.N.? Nice doublethink.

We knew this. We knew this from the beginning. What we didn’t know was that he didn’t have any WMD to attack with at the time of the invasion. Don’t you remember Bush saying that they’d be able to attack us with a nuke/bio-chem/nuclear anthrax bomb in just 48 hours? Or the smoking-gun-mushroom-cloud line? Or just the sheer amount of fucking urgency this administration lent to the invasion? The invasion of Iraq was sold to us, (well, not so much to us as to you. We, i.e. liberals, were saying the evidence was full of shit from the very beginning) and it was sold to us as the only logical response to an imminent attack.**

**Nope. Can you deny that this invasion was a drastic and expensive response to an as-of-yet immaterial threat?

**Nope. Do you believe that makes a difference?

The U.N. should decide whether or not it’s serious enough to invade. If not, more sanctions. (Or, what RedFury said.)

I think the method of resolution enforcement would best be left to those who made the resolutions in the first place, and, for that matter, those who have something resembling legitimacy

Scaling back our expectations, are we?

Few of us hate him. Hell, I don’t even dislike him. I just think it’s tragically unfortunate that he happens to be our un-elected president. And I wish I could live my life without wondering how much different things would have been if a whole shitload of mistakes hadn’t been made in Florida. Sigh.

I guess in the end I’m just astonished by the sheer amount of double-think coming out of the republican party in connection to this. Let’s get a few thing completely… fucking… straight… right… now:

The best defense is not an offense, unless you have dyslexia. The best defense is a defense.

You never have to hurt the ones you love, you always have a choice.

Oh yeah, and a pre-emptive strike cannot be justified by what might have happened. It’s quite possible that people have been saved by a pre-emptive strike, but I would exptect the people involved to be intellectually mature enough to confront just how morally dubious such an action is.

I’ve read the report carefully a couple of times (or at least the transcript of Kaye’s testimony.)

It contains a bit more positive information than I was expecting.

The bad news for Bush is that his imminence argument is conclusively false.

There is however more good news for Bush in the transcript than I had been expecting, particularly concerning bioweapons and missiles. I think the argument is very strong that Bush’s assertion that Saddamm had not given up his WMD ambitions and accepted disarmament is borne out in this report.

I want to thinkg about it some more and go over it more carefully and I want to look at it and discuss it objectively as possible and without an agenda, and would be interested in discussing it with people who make a sincere effort to do the same.

What I want to do is build rational conclusions, not make debating points.

You know, I was all in favor of that “rational” approach 9 months to a year ago. But that was before the administration pig-fuckers started playing up every conceivable scrap of anything as a goddamned “imminent threat” to America and Americans. The war is supposedly won. They’ve got SQUAT, and still these morons try to play up toothpicks like they’re nuclear weapons:

Fuck em. Any serious debate at this point serves only to rationalize or obfuscate the administration’s campaign to hoodwink millions of decent citizens into supporting a war for which there was no rationally adequate justification.

What they hell would Saddam do with botulinum anyway, mail every american a free sample of septic vichysoise ? For God’s sake, the bug is a microaerophile !

I hereby nominate myself as someone without an agenda, with simply oodles and gobs of rational arguments. But I fear that I lack friend Scylla’s patience, a willlingness to wait until Gabriel’s trumpet solo before we leap to any conclusions. I simply cannot match the patience of a man who can watch glacier races.

But lets just take an instance. Veep Cheney’s much repeated remark to the effect that he had definite proof that Saddam had “reconstituted his nuclear weapons program”. Not maybe, not perhaps, not hints needful of confirmation. Stated as fact.

A “fact” that’s wholly unsubstantiated by Mr. Kay’s research. What are we to make of this? Did Mr. Cheney refuse to share his solid evidence with Mr. Kay? Some unfortunate miscommunication? Rather a pity, don’t you think? If only Mr. Cheney had shared his irrefutable proof with Mr. Kay! Think how much simpler it might have been!

Perhaps someone should ask Mr. Cheney? Does anyone know where he is, so we can ask? That would be nice. Move things along.

And while he’s about it, why doesn’t he stop by Colin Powell’s office, pick up those piles of evidence that Colin used to present his solidly substantiated case to the UN Security Council. Apparently, Mr. Kay is wandering about the Godforsaken Desert with a dowsing rod. That seems hardly fair, since we have such solid proof at hand, proof of “huge stockpiles” of Bad Mojo. Or, at least, we did have. Did something happen to all that powerful proof? Was it misplaced? Did Bill Clinton steal it?

But friend Scylla has one thing clearly right: the “imminence” was false. I would have used the word “fraudulent”, since I suspect some intent. Oh, dear. Does that mean I have an “agenda”? Have I made a “debating point”? Darn. Outside of Scylla, that paragon of clear minded and unbiased analysis, where, oh where, can we find someone without an “agenda”? What with december being banned, and all.

Now, now, **Squink[/b, you were explicitly told: no agenda! And it is unkind of you to call the botulinum bug a pinhead. Spores have feelings, too, you know!

Scylla:

I’m with you. Since we also come from such widely divergent points of the political spectrum, anything we can agree on ought to serve as a good factual basis for both sides, and maybe help us get past the partisan bickering and down towards something resembling the “truth.” However, I haven’t had the chance to read the report fully yet.

Having said that, I just want to bring up one discrepancy that has fairly leapt out at me from what’s been posted thus far. First, consider this passage taken from Powell’s presentation to the UN on February 5, 2003:

Please note the underlined sentences. Here Powell seems to be arguing that chemical munitions can be identified at an ASP by virtue of special signature items. These signature items served as the basis for his assertion that the particular images he presented were, in fact, evidence of the presence chemical weapons at the bunkers.

Now, compare this to the following quote pesch posted, above, from Kay’s report:

Now it appears Kay is arguing, afterwards, that there is in essence no way to differentiate between chemical and non-chemical munitions at an ASP short of going through each site, on the ground, and physically inventorying all the weapons to see if some might contain chemicals.

I submit that these claims contradict each other. This contradiction implies that either Powell was lying in his presentation to the UN (because, in fact, as Kay asserts, one must inspect every munitions site on the ground in order to locate chemical weapons), or that Kay is lying in his report (because chemical munitions require special handling, procedures, and equipment, which can be unmistakably recognized even in satellite photos). I can’t see how you can have it both ways.

Note also the discrepancy in the site count: Powell identifies 65 potential dumps, whereas in Kay’s report the number of cites has jumped to 130. Granted, there might very well be a reasonable explanation for the difference; on the other hand, it might be possible that Kay is expanding the number of potential cites in an effort to obfuscate the embarrassing truth: that they have, in fact, failed to turn up any illicit weapons thus far.

In addition, I’d like to second hansel’s request, and ask you directly (or any other supporter of the war) why it is necessary to gather these scraps of evidence after the invasion, when the administration assured us that it had “bulletproof” evidence of Iraq’s possession of these “WMDs” prior to the invasion. Where is all that solid evidence? Why has the administration been reduced to cobbling together conjectures of “programs,” now, afterwards?

Finally, with regard to the OP: I would hope that you would change your tune, and admit that you were wrong, from the heart. I’d like to see you take a critical stance to the war, consistently, after your admission that the administration had mislead you regarding the gravity of the thread Iraq posed to the US. And most importantly, I would like it to affect your voting behavior in the next presidential election.

Well, we have to move Scylla along gently, Mr. S. Baby steps. He has already come to grips with the fact that the immediacy of the “threat” was entirely fraudulent. Must’nt push it too far, too fast, the threat of breakdown is very real when treating victims of Cognitive Dissonance.

A vision of the future…

Friend Scylla dandles Grandchild #8 on his knee…

“What did you do in those days, Grampa?”

“Why, I stood shoulder to shoulder with my comrades Minty, Diogenes, elucidator…

“Wow, Grampa! You knew elucidator?”

“Indeed I did, child. In fact, it was my cogent and concise arguments that led him to see the error of his ways and support my movement to have GeeDubya impeached and exiled to Akron. Which led, of course, to the election of President Clinton and the Golden Age…”

“I know! I know! That’s President Chelsea’s mom, isn’t it!”

If asked, of course, I will confirm the story as told. Grandfathers have a flexibility with truth denied to politicians.

I’m still trying to envision how the satelite photos managed to pick up the presence of the single vial in a frig. amazing.

You guys are all way behind. The spin as far back as June was that Saddam himself was a Weapon of Mass Destruction. There, libbies, we know he existed. Nyah nyah.

Never mind that he still isn’t actually, technically, in the strictest sense of the word, dead, or even gone from Iraq, but details are for the small-minded.

Well, as Ms. Rice points out, “The President is not a fact-checker.”

Bit of an understatement.

More of a “fact-chucker” actually.