Study: False statements preceded war

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yeah I think someone missed the 2003 State of the Union Speech... lol

Would that be the one where claims about Saddam's alleged attempt to buy Yellowcake Uranium were included, despite their having been debunked some time before?

That speech was at the tail end of the debate for war. We had been discussing it for many months by that time. Then Colin Powell made the speech to the UN on my birthday Feb. 5th, 2003

I did watch the 2003 State of the Union. I had also been writing my Congressman and Senators for months in support of the war by that time. I also sent letters during the Clinton Administration in support of tough action against Saddam. To no avail.

The Yellowcake claim is still supported by the British Government, which still claims it is true. Saddam's agents were there, but it was never stated that they received any Yellowcake, by anyone.

2003 eh? Seems it was old news a whole year before that...

2002 Memo Doubted Uranium Sale Claim

And then there's A Question of Trust

Greg Thielmann, then a high-ranking official at State's research unit, told TIME that it was not in Niger's self-interest to sell the Iraqis the destabilizing ore. "A whole lot of things told us that the report was bogus," Thielmann said later. "This wasn't highly contested. There weren't strong advocates on the other side. It was done, shot down."

Except that it wasn't. By late summer, at the very moment that the Administration was gearing up to make its case for military mobilization, the yellowcake story took on new life. In September, Tony Blair's government issued a 50-page dossier detailing the case against Saddam, and while much of the evidence in the paper was old, it made the first public claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. At the White House, Ari Fleischer endorsed the British dossier, saying "We agree with their findings."

I can't believe you are pulling out that crackpot Joe Wilson on me. His own report to the CIA contradicts his editorial in the New York Times. He is a phony. Completely discredited.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...4-2004Jul9.html

Plame's Input Is Cited on Niger Mission

Report Disputes Wilson's Claims on Trip, Wife's Role

By Susan Schmidt

Washington Post Staff Writer

Saturday, July 10, 2004; Page A09

Former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, dispatched by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate reports that Iraq sought to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program with uranium from Africa, was specifically recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to what he has said publicly.

Wilson last year launched a public firestorm with his accusations that the administration had manipulated intelligence to build a case for war. He has said that his trip to Niger should have laid to rest any notion that Iraq sought uranium there and has said his findings were ignored by the White House.

Wilson's assertions -- both about what he found in Niger and what the Bush administration did with the information -- were undermined yesterday in a bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report.

The panel found that Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address.

Yesterday's report said that whether Iraq sought to buy lightly enriched "yellowcake" uranium from Niger is one of the few bits of prewar intelligence that remains an open question. Much of the rest of the intelligence suggesting a buildup of weapons of mass destruction was unfounded, the report said.

The report turns a harsh spotlight on what Wilson has said about his role in gathering prewar intelligence, most pointedly by asserting that his wife, CIA employee Valerie Plame, recommended him.

Guy embarrasses the administration and gets ridiculed for it. Not heard that one before

In any case - read the wikipedia entry for a more complete history. They have more links than you do

Yellowcake Forgery

Including this of course... Prior to Wilson's visit.

Previously, in February 2002, three different American officials had made efforts to verify the reports. The deputy commander of U.S. Armed Forces Europe, Marine General Carlton W. Fulford, Jr., went to Niger and met with the country's president, Tandja Mamadou. He concluded that, given the controls on Niger's uranium supply, there was little chance any of it could have been diverted to Iraq. His report was sent to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard Myers. The U.S. Ambassador to Niger, Barbro Owens-Kirkpatrick, was also present at the meeting and sent similar conclusions to the State Department [2]. CNN reported on 14 March 2003 (before invasion) that the International Atomic Energy Agency found the documents to be forged

I dunno about Wilson's credibility... but this ought to tell you something.

Was he really wrong?

Edited January 28, 2008 by Number 6

[Cassie 8]

Seems that the Bush administration wasn't the only one making false statements.....

Saddam Hussein let the world think he had weapons of mass destruction to intimidate Iran and prevent the country from attacking Iraq, according to an FBI agent who interviewed the dictator after his 2003 capture.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/27/saddam.cbs/index.html

Yeah, toootally exonerating the Bush admin from going to war right without good intel?

I dunno, I'd rather side with reason before believing a captured dictator with delusions of grandeur.

I'm not exonerating them, that's for sure! I just find it amusing that we are hearing about this now.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I am sorry Dan, but your reasoning is too twisted for me to take anymore. You only talk in circles and do not have any core beliefs in regard to right and wrong, or truths and falsehoods.

Go ahead and continue to defend dictators and despots while condemning the one country in the world that is actually fighting to ensure Peace, Prosperity, Democracy and the Rule of Law. Does it make you feel good? Do you feel superior somehow?

I can not take your points seriously anymore. You obviously buy into the moral equivalence argument, that Saddam was as just and moral as the American people and we are just as guilty for Saddam's crimes as he is. Maybe more so in your mind. You have my deepest sympathies for your condition. I just pray that your type of thinking meets the scorn and ridicule that it deserves. Or the future is going to be very, very bleak for us all.

Im definetly not defending dictators, but I am criticizing our actions. Being able to criticizes the actions of our country is at the core of our democracy.

You give all these reasons, why we attacked Saddam, I give you more places where there are similar conditions and situations that we did nothing about and ask why?

There have been many more people killed in Sudan, than by Saddam. But we don't even talk about invading Sudan to put an end to the kill there. Why not?

Israel has defined many more UN resolutions that Iraq did, yet we where are our war plans for Israel?

Isn't part of upholding the rule of law, being fair and consistent to all those who don't follow it? Shouldn't we treat Israel like we do Iraq?

Why is Saddams killing of thousands of Iraqi's inexcusable, but the US military killing of thousands of Iraqi's excusable?

Do you apply your sense of morality to all people? or just those you like?

Discounting the many atrocities where the western world did sweet FA to stop massive carnage and genocide - Sudan, Rwanda, Cambodia, Burma, and closer to home in the former Yugoslavia exactly why do we tolerate countries like Saudi Arabia among our allies? Why do we tolerate Colonal Gadaffi of Libya. He's not a threat anymore - but I hardly think that means he's playing nice with his people all of a sudden.

Saying we did it for the Iraqi people might sound more palatable, but IMO it came pretty far down the list of our priorities - again as evidenced by the piss-poor post war planning.

If we were really concerned for human suffering - wouldn't we be a bit less selective about where we choose to intervene? Again - saying we fight for "freedom and liberty" makes for a great hand over the heart moment - but is that really what's going on? Or is that just how we sell it...?

Edited January 28, 2008 by Number 6

[HAL 9000 96]

Seems that the Bush administration wasn't the only one making false statements.....

Saddam Hussein let the world think he had weapons of mass destruction to intimidate Iran and prevent the country from attacking Iraq, according to an FBI agent who interviewed the dictator after his 2003 capture.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/27/saddam.cbs/index.html

Yeah, toootally exonerating the Bush admin from going to war right without good intel?

I dunno, I'd rather side with reason before believing a captured dictator with delusions of grandeur.

I'm not exonerating them, that's for sure! I just find it amusing that we are hearing about this now.

That I also find extremely amusing... almost 5 years ex post facto!

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

Sucked for him...

Then again, Bush said he had proof the dude had WMDs. Then soldiers paid and continue paying the price. I love these attempts at continuing to absolve the Bush administration of any responsibility in leading the democratic world.

This WMD argument was a small part of the whole case for war. It did not come into play until the very end of the debate.

The real case was:

* Failing to comply with the 1991 ceasefire agreement.

* Failing to comply with the 17 UN resolutions.

* Failing to comply with proper documentation of weapons declarations and destruction.

All this precedes the current Bush administration by many years.

The focus on the WMD argument is because the left loses all the other arguments in regard to the war so they repeat this one ad infinitum.

The left prefers to see the defeat of their own country while at war, for the political gain they would receive in pinning the blame on the President. I was never a big fan of President Clinton. But I would rather die then undermine my own country in a time of war. No matter who is President. The stakes are too high to be this irresponsible.

That to me, is not a case for, especially not on our own.

Have we attacked every country who didn't follow a UN resolution? Or didn't comply with a ceasefire agreement (I'm pretty sure Israel is on that list)?

I don't even think those reasons are strong enough for most Americans to support a war, much less a first strike. The reasons which the people did support, were either false or misleading.

Dan, When did we go to war with Israel? I don't remember that war. We enforce our ceasefire agreements with other countries. Not all ceasefire agreements.

Since when do we have to have the worlds blessings to defend ourselves? We never ended the war in the first place why should we have asked pretty please of the rest of the world. We must do what is right in spite of the feckless world.

Defend ourselves? Against what?

Question answered here!

Defend our honor, our word, our integrity to live up to our agreements. No matter how tough the task. To defend the rights and freedoms of our American citizens from rogue governments that have vowed to do us harm. Our agreement with Saddam was that we would not topple his government if he abide by the 1991 Gulf war cease fire agreement. When he did not we had every right to take him out without input from any other country period!

To not be spineless idiots that shy away from doing what is right because it is too hard or someone will not like us. If that causes them to not like us then they had resentment towards us already. In that case their opinion should not matter. Because if they do not have the Morals to oppose evil in its face they deserve the same fate as Saddam.

Edited January 28, 2008 by Don_Joy's Prince

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

[HAL 9000 96]

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

No, I already believed this before I ever knew who George W. Bush was.

I comes from being taught morals, values and character as a child.

My mother was the spin doctor!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

You'd actually be surprised. Its been lamented on here before that the CIA don't pay closer attention to what people say on VJ. It's also been suggested that names have been taken and reports to "law enforcement" have been considered... I kid you not.

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

No, I already believed this before I ever knew who George W. Bush was.

I comes from being taught morals, values and character as a child.

My mother was the spin doctor!

It sounds a tad naive IMO. The same sort of naivete that required villains in 50's westerns to wear black hats.

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

You'd actually be surprised. Its been lamented on here before that the CIA don't pay closer attention to what people say on VJ. It's also been suggested that names have been taken and reports to "law enforcement" have been considered... I kid you not.

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

No, I already believed this before I ever knew who George W. Bush was.

I comes from being taught morals, values and character as a child.

My mother was the spin doctor!

It sounds a tad naive IMO. The same sort of naivete that required villains in 50's westerns to wear black hats.

Ever think that maybe you are too jaded to actually believe in anything worth living or dying for? Is anything larger than "self " to you?

What is worth your giving your life for? My Family and my Country is it for me.

And I will fight to the death for Freedom, Democracy and Capitalism. The truth be told is that without Capitalism there is no Freedom or Democracy.

Edited January 28, 2008 by Don_Joy's Prince

[Dan J 277]

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

You'd actually be surprised. Its been lamented on here before that the CIA don't pay closer attention to what people say on VJ. It's also been suggested that names have been taken and reports to "law enforcement" have been considered... I kid you not.

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

No, I already believed this before I ever knew who George W. Bush was.

I comes from being taught morals, values and character as a child.

My mother was the spin doctor!

It sounds a tad naive IMO. The same sort of naivete that required villains in 50's westerns to wear black hats.

Ever think that maybe you are too jaded to actually believe in anything worth living or dying for? Is anything larger than "self " to you?

What is worth your giving your life for? My Family and my Country is it for me.

And I will fight to the death for Freedom, Democracy and Capitalism. The truth be told is that without Capitalism there is no Freedom or Democracy.

There are things worth dying for, but dying in a war that has its only justification imperialism, is not one of them.

Freedom and Democracy don't exist in a system of pure capitalism, just look at our history for examples of that.

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

You'd actually be surprised. Its been lamented on here before that the CIA don't pay closer attention to what people say on VJ. It's also been suggested that names have been taken and reports to "law enforcement" have been considered... I kid you not.

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

No, I already believed this before I ever knew who George W. Bush was.

I comes from being taught morals, values and character as a child.

My mother was the spin doctor!

It sounds a tad naive IMO. The same sort of naivete that required villains in 50's westerns to wear black hats.

Ever think that maybe you are too jaded to actually believe in anything worth living or dying for? Is anything larger than "self " to you?

What is worth your giving your life for? My Family and my Country is it for me.

And I will fight to the death for Freedom, Democracy and Capitalism. The truth be told is that without Capitalism there is no Freedom or Democracy.

There are things worth dying for, but dying in a war that has its only justification imperialism, is not one of them.

Freedom and Democracy don't exist in a system of pure capitalism, just look at our history for examples of that.

It is not imperialism, not even close. False statement and the imperialistic terminology undermines your credibility. I have stated the reasons you just don't understand the truth or are too blinded by ideology to accept them. If it was imperialism we would be swimming in oil, sorry that is not the case. America is not and never will be an imperialist nation. For one we don't have an emperor. I would give my life for my country in this conflict, without hesitation.

There is no freedom without economic freedom. This cannot come from government. Only from people when earn it through their own blood, sweat and tears, government can only hamper not help the creation of wealth.

Equal opportunity is what we should strive for not equal outcome. The outcome will always be equal misery for all, all except the small group of elites at the top that are the so-called enlightened ones. Capitalism has elevated the common man to levels of prosperity never before achieved in the history of mankind. Levels that are unattainable under any other system.

You are right Capitalism alone cannot exist without Rule of Law, an impartial court system to redress grievances and the right of private property. Government should use a light touch in restrictions of Capitalism. Right now we have judges do not follow the Rule of Law and are very partisan and not impartial. And politicians who trample on the rights of private property owners.

All in the name of the Progressive agenda. This so called progress is progressing towards the statement I made above. " The outcome will always be equal misery for all, all except the small group of elites at the top that are the so-called enlightened ones. "

I prefer to keep the power with the people not the elitist "I know better than you whats good for you" progressive politician. I can take care of myself thank you. and the truth is that the American people would be a lot better off if the problems they faced were solved with free market solutions and not big government bureaucracy and the iron fist of government.

[Dan J 277]

It is not imperialism, not even close. False statement and the imperialistic terminology undermines your credibility. I have stated the reasons you just don't understand the truth or are too blinded by ideology to accept them. If it was imperialism we would be swimming in oil, sorry that is not the case. America is not and never will be an imperialist nation. For one we don't have an emperor. I would give my life for my country in this conflict, without hesitation.

The only reason why we haven't had more wars due to imperialism, is because of democracy. Without 9/11, even though the 2 events are not even related, Iraq would have never happened.

There is no freedom without economic freedom. This cannot come from government. Only from people when earn it through their own blood, sweat and tears, government can only hamper not help the creation of wealth.

Without the balance of the government, it will be the wealth of few, not many. And your chance of gaining wealth is tiny unless you are born into it. Just look at the patterns of wealth in the late 19th and early 20th century, here in the US.

Equal opportunity is what we should strive for not equal outcome. The outcome will always be equal misery for all, all except the small group of elites at the top that are the so-called enlightened ones. Capitalism has elevated the common man to levels of prosperity never before achieved in the history of mankind. Levels that are unattainable under any other system.

Surprisingly, Unions are responsible for that, not capitalism. Back when capitalism was less restricted. Most people never had a chance at being wealthy. Many were just lucky to get work, and much of it was long hours for little pay in dangerous conditions. Unions were responsible for turning that around. And many gave their lives to that cause. It was also what eventually lead to a strong middle class in the middle of the 20th century. But economic polices since have eroded that.

You are right Capitalism alone cannot exist without Rule of Law, an impartial court system to redress grievances and the right of private property. Government should use a light touch in restrictions of Capitalism. Right now we have judges do not follow the Rule of Law and are very partisan and not impartial. And politicians who trample on the rights of private property owners.

In order to provide equal opportunity, then the government may need to do that from time to time. Capitalism alone will only provide opportunity that serves the corporation.

All in the name of the Progressive agenda. This so called progress is progressing towards the statement I made above. " The outcome will always be equal misery for all, all except the small group of elites at the top that are the so-called enlightened ones. "

Yes we are, but not in the way your thinking. We are reestablishing a small group of wealthy people, that will eventually have control of most of the wealth. Which will result in very little Freedom or Democracy for those outside of that class. I suppose you would rather have that?

I prefer to keep the power with the people not the elitist "I know better than you whats good for you" progressive politician. I can take care of myself thank you. and the truth is that the American people would be a lot better off if the problems they faced were solved with free market solutions and not big government bureaucracy and the iron fist of government.

Competition can make things cheaper, but in pure capitalism, competition doesn't exist. Maximum profit comes from controlling the market. An unrestricted market, will form monopolies to control the market. Any competing product gets bought out, blocked, or otherwise pushed off the market by the controlling company.

Health care doesn't have any competition, and due to the unique nature of the market, it likely won't. We have let the free market run health care in to a hugely expensive mess, that soon will be only available to the wealthy. Is that really solving problems? Or just creating more?

Bringing free market contractors into our military, has caused a lot of public diplomacy problems. And can things really be cheaper, when the company involved doesn't even have to compete for the contract?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

You'd actually be surprised. Its been lamented on here before that the CIA don't pay closer attention to what people say on VJ. It's also been suggested that names have been taken and reports to "law enforcement" have been considered... I kid you not.

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

No, I already believed this before I ever knew who George W. Bush was.

I comes from being taught morals, values and character as a child.

My mother was the spin doctor!

It sounds a tad naive IMO. The same sort of naivete that required villains in 50's westerns to wear black hats.

Ever think that maybe you are too jaded to actually believe in anything worth living or dying for? Is anything larger than "self " to you?

What is worth your giving your life for? My Family and my Country is it for me.

And I will fight to the death for Freedom, Democracy and Capitalism. The truth be told is that without Capitalism there is no Freedom or Democracy.

Sure. Just not this.

You've wrapped this whole thing up in relative terms and rhetoric. Chest-beating is all well and good - but it doesn't cut it for me unfortunately.

You've said before on numerous occasions that the problem with "folks like us" is that we allow our hearts to rule our heads. Reading the kind of stuff you put out above - I can't help thinking that you seem to be the target of your own criticism.

[HAL 9000 96]

Then according to this logic we should have our Armed Forces everywhere and anywhere certain VJers moral tests are not met. What a wonderful world that could be!

You'd actually be surprised. Its been lamented on here before that the CIA don't pay closer attention to what people say on VJ. It's also been suggested that names have been taken and reports to "law enforcement" have been considered... I kid you not.

Wow... Bushco's speechwriters and spin-doctors sure have done a number on you...

No, I already believed this before I ever knew who George W. Bush was.

I comes from being taught morals, values and character as a child.

My mother was the spin doctor!

It sounds a tad naive IMO. The same sort of naivete that required villains in 50's westerns to wear black hats.

At minimum the Marines should sponsor a recruitment tile on this board given the excellent enlistment rate some of these Section 8ers display.