Which is it?

  1. I'm divided. I'm not sure whether it was mere hype or poor intelligence either, but I do agree the decision to go to war has harmed our credibility since we have not been able to find the WMD that the president assured was such a threat.


    Democrats Question Whether Bush 'Hyped' Iraq Threat
    Sun May 25, 2003 01:49 PM ET

    By Vicki Allen
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Top Senate Democrats on Sunday said they believed the Bush administration either exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq, or may have had faulty intelligence on its alleged weapons of mass destruction.

    Joe Biden of Delaware, the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the administration "hyped" Iraq's potential for developing nuclear arms and for using other weapons of mass destruction, but said he expected such weapons will be found.

    Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the Senate Intelligence Committee's senior Democrat, said he was "beginning to believe" that the intelligence the administration claimed to have on Iraq's weapons program before the U.S.-led war to oust Saddam Hussein was not as sound as he had been led to believe.

    Appearing on NBC's Meet the Press, the lawmakers gave voice to growing concerns in Congress over the failure so far to find Iraq's alleged biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons that President Bush used to justify the war.

    "I do think that we hyped nuclear, we hyped al Qaeda, we hyped the ability to disperse and use these weapons. I think that tends to be done by all presidents when they are trying to accomplish a goal that they want to get broad national support for," Biden said.

    Rockefeller said Congress must determine whether the administration "intentionally overestimated" Iraq's weapons program, or "just misread it. ... In either case it's a very bad outcome."

    Republican Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, the Intelligence Committee chairman, said he expected weapons to be found, and that the United States must make certain they have not fallen into the hands of terrorists or rogue nations.

    If the weapons are not found, Roberts said on Meet the Press, "Basically, you have a real credibility problem."

    "There's not any doubt that he had weapons of mass destruction. The question is, where are they?" Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, said on CNN's Late Edition.

    Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who led opposition in the Senate to the Iraq war, last week delivered a blistering speech accusing Bush of constructing a "house of cards, built on deceit" to justify the war.

    Biden, who backed Bush's call to oust Saddam, stopped short of saying there was a deliberate deception. But he said, "I think a lot of the hype here is a serious, serious, serious mistake and it hurts our credibility."

    House Intelligence Committee Chairman Porter Goss, a Florida Republican, said on CBS' Face the Nation that he had "no doubts whatsoever that the administration worked on the basis of the intelligence that was given to them.

    "What I don't know is how good that intelligence was, and it is our job to find out."
  2. 10 Comments

  3. by   pickledpepperRN
    Secretary of State Colin Powell's now infamous speech to the U.N. Security Council employed "intelligence"
    from a graduate student's thesis, documents later acknowledged as fakes, and a defector's affirmation of the
    existence of chemical weapons while excluding his admission that they had subsequently been destroyed.

    Having taken over the country, we now know with a great deal of certainty that if chemical or biological
    weapons were
    extant there, they were not deployed within the Iraqi military in a manner that threatened the U.S. or anyone

    Likewise, Bush's fear-mongering about Iraq's alleged nuclear weapons program has proven baseless. There was
    reason to hurriedly yank the U.N. inspectors out of Iraq.

    "The Iraqi regime continues to possess and conceal some of the
    most lethal weapons ever devised," said President Bush, warning
    Iraq was intent on attacking the U.S. But Mohamed el-Baradei, chief
    of the UN nuclear weapons inspection agency (IAEA), concluded in
    March: "No evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a
    nuclear weapons program in Iraq." The same for gas and germs.

    U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell claimed before the UN,
    backed up by a dossier from British intelligence, that Washington
    and London had a long list of sites in Iraq containing weapons of
    mass destruction (WMDs). When inspected by the UN, and, later,
    U.S. troops, none contained any WMDs. Part of London's damning
    dossier on Iraq was revealed to have been plagiarized from a
    10-year-old graduate thesis.

    "Iraq is trying to procure uranium," thundered Colin Powell at the
    UN. Washington and London claimed Iraq imported yellowcake
    uranium from Niger to make nuclear weapons. In March, UN experts
    concluded the documents purportedly confirming the uranium sales
    were "not authentic" and in fact "crude fabrications."

    Fictitious uranium

    Bush: "Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminium
    tubes for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for
    nuclear weapons." The uranium to be enriched was, of course, the
    same fictitious uranium from Niger. UN inspectors found the tubes
    were for short-range, 81-mm artillery rockets.

    The U.S. claimed Iraq was an ally of al-Qaida. No terrorist links
    have so far been found. Just a retired Palestinian thug, Abu Abbas.
    The notorious Ansar al-Islam "terror and poison camp" turned out to
    be mud huts occupied by motley Islamists who regularly denounced
    bin Laden.

    The mobile germ warfare trucks Powell warned about - a.k.a.
    "Winnebagos of Death" - turned out to be mobile food inspection
    labs. Iraq's "drones of death" that Bush warned might fly off ships to
    attack the U.S. with pestilence were, on inspection, two rickety
    model airplanes.

    The Bush administration concealed from Americans that in 1995
    Saddam Hussein's son-in-law, Gen. Hussein Kamel, had told the
    UN arms inspection agency and the CIA he had personally
    supervised destruction of all of Iraq's biological and chemical
    weapons (mostly supplied by the U.S. and Britain in the 1980s).
    Glen Rangwala, of Cambridge University, who exposed London's
    plagiarized Iraq dossier, obtained the transcript of the Kamel

    Copyright 2003 Los Angeles Times
  4. by   jnette
    Guess as in anything else, we'll just have to ride it out.. we'll know in time.

    I'd sure hate to know the above are true...disturbing, to say the least. We'll see...

    ps... where ya been hiding, Sbic ? Did you like your Burfday Turltes?
  5. by   Mkue
    As of today, I feel the biggest WMD was Saddam and his Regime. They are gone, the people are free, not in a totally stable country yet, but that will come. WMD have not been confirmed, that is true. Will WMD be found soon? I don't know. I stand by the Just War Theory still and believe it was the right thing to do.

    Pres. Bush's Tax-cut passed, we have captured many high ranking Iraqi officials and Terrorist leaders. Pres. Bush continues to fight Terrorism and is concerned about Homeland Security.

    Pres. Bush continues to press Israeli and Palestinian prime ministers and the leaders of key Arab nations for progress in the international peace plan for the Middle East.

    President Bush has taken the lead in the struggle against AIDS, not only nationwide, but worldwide.

    The liberal media continues to cover-up other accomplishments.

    It's not a perfect world, but things could be a lot worse IMO

  6. by   fab4fan
    Just as the conservatives continue to demonize Clinton, Marie.
  7. by   Furball
    Well...the war was called "Operation Iraqi Freedom"... right? It certainly wasn't the only reason for war. WMD, ridding the world of Hussein, oil (?), freeing the Iraqi citizens, stopping the atrocities.

    I heard someone say today on a news show that Reagan only campaigned on issues and wouldn't stoop to personal attacks....I wish politics today would follow that creed....but it won't happen.

    Clinton continues to be blamed for everything under the sun according to the Repubs and the Demo's can't tolerate the gains Bush has made in the war on terror....sad.
  8. by   pickledpepperRN
    Remarks to the United Nations Security Council

    Secretary Colin L. Powell
    New York City
    February 5, 2003 exerpts
    I asked for this session today for two purposes. First, to support the core assessments made by Dr. Blix and Dr. ElBaradei. As
    Dr. Blix reported to this Council on January 27, "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the
    disarmament which was demanded of it." ...
    My second purpose today is to provide you with additional information, to share with you what the United States knows about
    Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, as well as Iraq's involvement in terrorism, which is also the subject of Resolution 1441 and other earlier resolutions.

    I might add at this point that we are providing all relevant information we can to the inspection teams for them to do their work.

    The material I will present to you comes from a variety of sources. Some are U.S. sources and some are those of other countries. Some are the sources are
    technical, such as intercepted telephone conversations and photos taken by satellites. Other sources are people who have risked their lives to let the world know
    what Saddam Hussein is really up to. ...
    Numerous human sources tell us that the Iraqis are moving not just documents and hard drives, but weapons of mass destruction, to keep them from being found
    by inspectors. While we were here in this Council chamber debating Resolution 1441 last fall, we know, we know from sources that a missile brigade outside
    Baghdad was dispersing rocket launchers and warheads containing biological warfare agent to various locations, distributing them to various locations in western
    Let me say a word about satellite images before I show a couple. The photos that I am about to show you are sometimes hard for the average person to interpret...
    Here you see 15 munitions bunkers in yellow and red outlines. The four that are in red squares represent active chemical
    munitions bunkers.

    How do I know that? How can I say that? Let me give you a closer look. Look at the image
    on the left. On the left is a close-up of one of the four chemical bunkers. The two arrows
    indicate the presence of sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions. ..
    Ladies and gentlemen, these are not assertions. These are facts corroborated by many sources, some of them sources of the intelligence services of other
    countries...Iraq declared 8500 liters of anthrax. But UNSCOM estimates that Saddam Hussein could have produced 25,000 liters. If concentrated into this dry form, this amount
    would be enough to fill tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of teaspoons. And Saddam Hussein has not verifiably accounted for even one teaspoonful of this
    deadly material. And that is my third point. And it is key. The Iraqis have never accounted for all of the biological weapons they admitted they had and we know they
    There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more. And he has the ability to dispense
    these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction...
    f we consider just one category of missing weaponry, 6500 bombs from the Iran-Iraq War, UNMOVIC says the amount of
    chemical agent in them would be on the order of a thousand tons.

    These quantities of chemical weapons are now unaccounted for. Dr. Blix has quipped that, "Mustard gas is not marmalade. You are supposed to know what you
    did with it." We believe Saddam Hussein knows what he did with it and he has not come clean with the international community.
    To support its deadly biological and chemical weapons programs, Iraq procures needed items from around the world using
    an extensive clandestine network. What we know comes largely from intercepted communications and human sources who
    are in a position to know the facts.
    Saddam Hussein has chemical weapons. Saddam Hussein has used such weapons. And Saddam Hussein has no
    compunction about using them again -- against his neighbors and against his own people. And we have sources who tell us
    that he recently has authorized his field commanders to use them. He wouldn't be passing out the orders if he didn't have the
    weapons or the intent to use them.
    The United States will not and cannot run that risk for the American people. Leaving Saddam Hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few
    more months or years is not an option, not in a post-September 11th world.

  9. by   pickledpepperRN
    According to information obtained by the AGWVA, there is irrefutable evidence to show that the United States government provided and encouraged Iraq's use of
    chemical weapons. The United States Department of Commerce and The American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) provided at least 80 shipments of biological
    agents that were not attenuated (or weakened) and were capable of reproduction. These shipments included such virulent agents as Anthrax, West Nile Virus and
    Clostridium botulinum (S.R.103-900, May 25, 1994, pg. 264).

    The AGWVA also found it very disturbing to learn that on December 19, 1983, the Middle Eastern envoy who carried a handwritten note from President Reagan to
    Saddam Hussein, to "resume our diplomatic relations with Iraq" was none other than our present Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld.

    According to "U.S. Diplomatic and Commercial Relationships with Iraq", 1980-August 2, 2000, (http://www.cam.ac.uk/societies/casi/...raq80s90s.html),
    Nathaniel Hurd states:
    10 Sept. 2002
    Contact Person: Gary Treece


    As the Bush administration works to gain world support to conduct a pre-emptive strike against Iraq, new disturbing information has surfaced with regard to U.S.
    involvement in the development of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons program.

    The pre-emptive strike is based upon President Bush and Vice-President Cheney's beliefs that there must be an invasion of Iraq because Saddam Hussein:

    1. possesses weapons of mass destruction and the potential for nuclear weapons,
    2. used these weapons on his own people (Kurds) and the Iranians,
    3. has a history of lying to the world.

    "Iraq reportedly began using chemical weapons (CW) against Iranian troops in 1982, and significantly increased CW use in 1983... Shortly after
    removing Iraq from the terrorism sponsorship list, the Reagan administration approved the sale of 60 Hughes helicopters. Analysts recognized
    that "civilian" helicopters can be weaponized in a matter of hours and selling a civilian kit can be a way of giving military aid under the guise of
    civilian assistance."

    Mark Phythian, in his book Arming Iraq: How the U.S. and Britain Secretly Built Saddam's War Machine" (Northeastern University Press, 1997) stated:

    " ...the Secretaries of Commerce and State (George Baldridge and George Shultz) lobbied the NSC (National Security Council) advisor into
    agreeing to the sale to Iraq of 10 Bell helicopters, officially for crop spraying. It is believed that US-supplied choppers were used in the 1988
    chemical attack on the Kurdish village Halabja, which killed 5000 people."

    In his own book Turmoil and Triumph: My Years as Secretary of State, George Shultz refers to a declassified CIA report which notes Iraq's use of mustard
    gas in August 1983, giving further credence to the suggestion that the State Department and/or the National Security Council (NSC) was well aware of Iraq's use of
    chemical weapons at this time. If the use of chemical weapons was known in August of 1983, and Donald Rumsfeld went to Iraq in December of 1983,
    he was on notice that this country was using and was going to continue to use weapons of mass destruction. Why, then, did the United States move to
    de-list Iraq from those considered to be terrorist nations?

    On March 23, 1984, Iran accused Iraq of poisoning 600 of its soldiers with mustard gas and Tabun nerve gas. Donald Rumsfeld returned to Baghdad on March 24,
    1984. On that same day, the UPI wire service reported that a team of UN experts had concluded that:

    "Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers. Meanwhile, Donald Rumsfeld held talks with foreign minister
    Tariq Aziz."

    Probably the most critical piece of information is that according to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to
    secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to "calibrate" mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops.

    It is public record that the U.S. not only armed Iraq from 1983 thru August 1, 1990, but that they also provided the money to Iraq to purchase the weapons via the
    Atlanta branch of the Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL), George Bush, Sr., and the Export-Import Bank. Iraq received $5 Billion dollars funneled through
    the Commercial Credit Corporation ostensibly for food credits. It is also public information that at least $2 Billion dollars from the defaulted loan was repaid by
    the U.S. citizen taxpayers.

    Joyce Riley, spokesperson for the American Gulf War Veterans Association has for seven years been shining the light of accountability on the Department of Defense
    for having armed our "enemy" with weapons of mass destruction, exposing our military to these weapons and then denying not only their culpability but the very
    existence of the mystery diseases. She often quotes Senator Donald Riegle (D-MI) who stated in Senate Report 103-900, "Our troops are not just sick, they are

    Riley, a former Captain in the United States Air Force Reserve and Flight Nurse states: "If it wasn't bad enough to watch our troops become ill from our own
    weapons... the Department of Defense labeled our sick men and women as "mental cases." These proud men and women have been abandoned, are
    now sick and must fight the battle alone. These needless illnesses and deaths now lie at the feet of the Pentagon and Veterans' Administration

    d (a) See the evidence collected in Cong. Henry Waxman's letter to
    George W. Bush, 3/17/03,
    http://www.house.gov/waxman/text/ad...rch_17_let.htm. (b) See Glen
    Rangwala's report, http://traprockpeace.org/britishdossier.html. (c) See
    Glen Rangwala's report, http://traprockpeace.org/kamel.html.
    4. d (a) Martin Bright, Ed Vulliamy, and Peter Beaumont, The Observer
    of Support from Coalition, 3/25/03,
    population calculated from Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2001,
    Implementation Challenges and Solutions, Monterey Institute, April 2001, pp.
    23-29, http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/tuckcwc.htm; Jonathan Tucker, "The
    Fifth Review Conference of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention,"
    Feb. 2002, http://www.nti.org/e_research/e3_7b.html. (c) Testimony before
    the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, excerpted at



    enhance our status as a champion of peace and justice.



    Vets Group Wants Rumsfeld Out Over Alleged Shipment to Iraq
    The first is the Presidents speech at the start of the war. Following include some of the horrors of war.
    PLEASE! Don't open if you don't want to know.

    And Afghanistan:
    Do you believe the Congressman or the President?

    1] Blair Says Iraqis Could Launch Chemical Warheads in Minutes, New York Times (Sept. 25, 2002).
    [2] Threats and Responses: Report by Iraq, Iraq Arms Report Has Big Omissions, U.S. Officials Say, New York
    Times (Dec. 13, 2002) (emphasis added).
    [3] U.S. Issues a List of the Shortcomings in Iraqi Arms Declaration, Los Angeles Times (Dec. 20, 2002)
    (emphasis added).
    [4] The President, State of the Union Address (Jan. 28, 2003) (online at
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...03/01/20030128 19.html) (emphasis added).
    [5] A War Cry Tempered by Eloquence, Washington Post (Jan. 29, 2003).
    [6] Press Conference with Donald Rumsfeld, General Richard Myers, Cable News Network (Jan. 29, 2003)
    (emphasis added).
    [7] IAEA Director General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, The Status of Nuclear Inspections in Iraq: An Update (Mar.
    7, 2002) (online at www.iaea.org/worldatom/Press/Statements/ 2003/ebsp2003n006.shtml).
    [8] Some Evidence on Iraq Called Fake; U.N. Nuclear Inspector Says Documents on Purchases Were Forged,
    Washington Post (Mar. 8, 2003).
    [9] Id.
    [10] U.N. Saying Documents Were Faked, CNN American Morning with Paula Zahn (Mar. 14, 2003).
    [11] Italy May Have Been Misled by Fake Iraq Arms Papers, U.S. Says, Los Angeles Times (Mar. 15, 2003).
    [12] FBI Probes Fake Evidence of Iraqi Nuclear Plans, Washington Post (Mar. 13, 2003).
    [13] IAEA Director General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, supra note 7 (emphasis added).
    [14] Id. (emphasis added).
    [15] Some Evidence on Iraq Called Fake, supra note 8.
    [16] The White House, Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer (Mar. 14, 2003) (online at
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030314-12.html) (emphasis added).
  10. by   Mkue
    No Political Fallout for Bush on Weapons

    By Dana Milbank and Jim VandeHei
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Saturday, May 17, 2003; Page A01

    President Bush appears to be in no political danger from the failure to find chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in Iraq, with Democrats reluctant to challenge Bush on any aspect of the war and polls showing Americans unconcerned about weapons discoveries.


    It's too early to point fingers, IMO, we all know that SH was excellent at hiding things and had plenty of time to do so. Time will tell.
  11. by   donmurray
    Hiding things? We invaded a sovereign nation because their tyrant leader hid stuff?
    We were told that had to go in urgently in self -defence before he used WMD on the west. Either our invading troops wore their chemical/biological suits as part of a top secret weight loss programme, or the Pentagon/Downing Street expected WMD to be used on them. In order that it be used, it had to be immediately available. We were told at first that WMD were not used because our advance was so fast. If that were so, where are they?
    Jack Straw, our Foreign Secretary has said finding the WMD is not important, the main thing is, We stopped SH. I think finding them is very important, because either they never existed, and we were lied to, or they do, but we don't know who has them, and that is frightening, whichever way you look at it.
    Either the WMD we
  12. by   pickledpepperRN
    Frightening is right.
    Either there are WMD we can't fine and may yet be used against us or our governments are dishonest enough to start a war based on lies!
    Who feels safer now?