- Joined
- May 29, 2009
- Messages
- 13,061
- Reaction score
- 5,128
- Location
- USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Where's your link?
Do a search for the 2002 Iraq WMD NIE.
Last edited:
Where's your link?
Never said they removed it. Again, you either have reading difficulties or you're being dishonest. I said they were in the NIE but not in the presidnet's arguments. Pay attention please.
Boo Radley posted:
And yes, you do have to look at the entire information, and that is exactly what I've asked you to. If you remove the conflicting information, the doubted information, you have the Clinton NIE. That NIE reached a different conclusion.
And? I don't think that addresses wether the NIe assessment indicated that it was beleived that Iraq had active WMD programs. Did you have anything to offer in regards to the conversation we are actually having, or do you prefer just posting random videos?
@approximately 25 seconds in Bush admits Iraq did not have WMD. He then states Iraq had the capability. I would imagine ANY country has the "ability". He then goes into the real reason for attacking Iraq which was clearly an international war crime. Attacking Saddam/Iraq was an easy sell in the wake of 9-11. Who the hell would say no to going to war and risk appearing like a traitor or ***** for the next election cycle?
Do a search for the 2002 Iraq WMD NIE.
You clearly stated that if we removed the conflicting information, we would reach the same conclusion as the Clinton NIE (which I really don't know what conclusion that reached, nor do I really care). Previously you indicated that there was conflicting information as to wether or not Iraq had WMD programs. So, what conflicting information, if not the alleged conflicting information on Iraq's WMD programs, do you think we should remove to reach a conclusion that better fits your views?
Yes, I think it has become fairly obvious that Iraq probably did not have active WMD programs. However, what we are actually discussing is wether the NIE indicated the intelligence community believed that Iraq had WMD programs.
It clearly did, as both the actual estimate and the chairman of the NIC indicated. The chairman of the NIC has clearly indicated that most governments outside of Iraq believed that Iraq had WMD programs and stockpiles.
In other words, we are discussing wether Bush lied or just believed faulty intelligence. Do you have anything to offer in regards to this discussion?
No, that he had growing programs, activley increasing his ability, gathering more weapons, stockpiling, the Bush claim. But get your link and I'll show you what I mean.
I have many times before, but you can make the work easier by linking and noted pages. Once you do that, we can more on to what else is there. And this is where you should have started to begin with.
Yes, in Bush's argument. Remember, the CIA doesn't make conclusions about going to war. The rpesident did in this case. The only thing new in the NIE is the disputed information, which BUSH used in his arguments.
We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and
restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as
well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if
left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during
this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these
Key Judgments.)
Iraq has largely rebuilt missile and biological weapons
facilities damaged during
Operation Desert Fox and has expanded its chemical and
biological infrastructure under
We judge that all key aspects--R&D, production, and
weaponization--of Iraq's offensive BW program are active and
that most elements are larger and more advanced than they
were before the Gulf war.
We judge Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW agents
and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety
of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs,
missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives.