They say when it rains, it pours. The WaPo has a new scoop on the old ‘mobile bioweapons labs’ story:
On May 29, 2003, 50 days after the fall of Baghdad, President Bush proclaimed a fresh victory for his administration in Iraq: Two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile “biological laboratories.” He declared, “We have found the weapons of mass destruction.”
Minor point of interest, it took me about ten minutes to figure out that any pathogens grown in the “mobile labs” from the leaked photos would have mostly killed the people in and around the trailers. That is if you can somehow manage to maintain the tanks to within a few tenths of a degree of human body temperature, which the trailers obviously could not. That led to an entertaining exchange with a message-board wingnut who insisted that Iraq parked the trailers in secret climate-controlled warehouses kept within a few tenths of 37 celsius (yes, in the desert). Some people will. not. let. go. of that precious morphine lever.
Speaking of people wanting something so badly to be true that reality takes a backseat,
…But even as Bush spoke, U.S. intelligence officials possessed powerful evidence that it was not true.
A secret fact-finding mission to Iraq — not made public until now — had already concluded that the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons. Leaders of the Pentagon-sponsored mission transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003, two days before the president’s statement.
The three-page field report and a 122-page final report three weeks later were stamped “secret” and shelved. Meanwhile, for nearly a year, administration and intelligence officials continued to publicly assert that the trailers were weapons factories.
The claim, repeated by top administration officials for months afterward, was hailed at the time as a vindication of the decision to go to war.
Sadly I am neither shocked nor surprised.
Punchy
I just read this and am floored. It appears that this IS evidence that Bush flat-out lied. Unanimous–and that’s important–findings in his hands days before he says otherwise? How can Scooter Mac possibly spin THIS?
Every day a new gut punch of reality that these guys are absolutely corrupt.
DecidedFenceSitter
Actually Punchy, if it made it to Washington days before the speech it is entirely likely that it hadn’t gotten cycled upwards through the bureacracy to get investigated. ESPECIALLY if it was classified, which means that either a guide would have been needed, or a special decision made.
However, that is no excuse for making the claims afterwards.
fwiffo
The fact that this was known two days before his statement isn’t the key part; there’s plausable deniability. It’s possible that information hadn’t made it all the way up the food-chain of by then. I don’t think I’d give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to honesty, but it is plausable. The part that’s truly damning is that they kept on saying it for a nearly year afterwards.
Confederate Yankee
Simple, he can read the 12th paragraph of the article aloud to the White House Press Corps, which reads:
The bold above is mine. There were not “unanimous findings” as Joby Warrick states in his deceptive article. As matter of fact, at the time Bush was making his statements the view of the civilian team was a minority view, though one later deemed by most to be the correct interpretation. The two military teams comprised the opposite, majority view at the time.
This story is fraudulent. The Washington Post has a LOT of explaining to do.
Barry
Simple: Bush was misinformed by Evul Saddam-loving/America-hating Libruls! Who should be punished.
Add-ons:
1) That’s old news, only Evul Saddam-loving/America-hating Libruls care about it. We’re in the war; we’ve got to stick with Bush.
2) The real reason for the war was democracy and human rights; WMD’s were merely a necessary non-truth to prevent Evul Saddam-loving/America-hating Libruls from opposing the liberation.
It’s not hard; I could be so drunk that I couldn’t stand up, and still hammer these out (as long as somebody put the computer on the floor).
Barry
Sorry, comments were rolling in; I was replying to the first comment, about how Bush could get away with this.
Barry
DecidedFenceSitter Says:
“Actually Punchy, if it made it to Washington days before the speech it is entirely likely that it hadn’t gotten cycled upwards through the bureacracy to get investigated. ESPECIALLY if it was classified, which means that either a guide would have been needed, or a special decision made.
However, that is no excuse for making the claims afterwards.”
And having things caught in the bureaucracy is not valid, for two reasons – first, that the administration never hesitated to cut them out of the loop when they felt like it; second, the presence/amount/nature of WMD’s was vitatl to justify the war.
Faux News
Thank God we have the RedState.com Retards like Confederate Yankee to amuse us. As stated on another BB:
Next, Confederate Yankkke says Cheney has performed cold fusion in a Dunkin Donuts styrofoam cup!
zzyzx
It must be nice to have the power to classify any data that contradicts your assumptions.
Davebo
So the “military experts” were sure it was for bio weapons, and the actual bioweapons experts were unanimous that is could not have been for bioweapons.
Does this remind everyone of the aluminum tubes? Where the CIA and NSA were sure they were for enriching uranium, but the DOE, they guys who, you know, actually have enriched uranium, said there was no way?
Of course given this administrations aversion to real science, who could be suprised?
One wonders why they just didn’t Fed Ex some polaroids to Confederate Yankee and get a real “expert” opinion? It would have saved a ton of money and produced the results they had already decided to report anyway.
Richard Bottoms
Can we say Bush lied now, John?
Davebo
Best excert.
scarshapedstar
Shorter Confederate Yankee:
The buck stops there.
Ryan S
That of course, would be illegal.
scarshapedstar
Again, I must ask: what is it, exactly, that Bush does? Cons like Confederate don’t even expect him to make the right decisions anymore, just to parrot whatever someone tells him, and if they were wrong, hey, can’t blame him. Wouldn’t it be simpler to just have the military teams, or whoever has him leased for that day, make the speeches? It would save him a lot of excuse-making.
Do I need to mention that he hasn’t even vetoed a goddamn bill? What the hell does he do, besides “comfort” us after one of his trademark disasters, like a national Oprah Winfrey? I could build a Comfort-n-Resolute-o-Tron 2000 for way less than Bush’s salary and it would accomplish the same thing: jack shit.
Nikki
One would imagine that, since American soldiers’ lives would be on the line, a competent administration would’ve waited for confirmation, especially since that negative confirmation came just a few days later.
Ancient Purple
If only.
Too bad we are stuck with the most incompetent one for the next three years.
As the bumperstickers in Phoenix are now saying: “I never thought I would miss Nixon.”
Faux News
http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2005/083005.asp
ppGaz
That’s your money quote.
Forget the original “mistake.” I mean, literally, forget it. Stamp it “secret” and just pretend it never happened.
That’s the way this team of stupid fucks will be remembered … the buck gets stamped secret and stuffed in a drawer. Never … ever …get held accountable for anything.
For Ancient Purple: I saw this sticker the other day in downtown Phoenix:
Bob In Pacifica
Confederate Yankee reports that Cheney’s sinker, which the radar gun picked up at ninety-seven miles an hour, nicked the corner of the strike zone. Fans cheered wildly.
Cheney said that his sinker was more reliable than his curveball.
Steve
Here’s a timeline, based on the WaPo article, that may make things easier to understand.
2/5/03 – Colin Powell tells the U.N. Security Council, “We have firsthand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails.” His statement is based on diagrams generated by now-discredited informant Curveball.
3/20/03 – Invasion of Iraq begins.
April 2003 – Two trailers matching Curveball’s descriptions are found in separate locations in Iraq. “Both were painted military green and outfitted with a suspicious array of gear: large metal tanks, motors, compressors, pipes and valves.”
A debate ensues as to whether the trailers are really bioweapons facilities. “Two teams of military experts who viewed the trailers soon after their discovery concluded that the facilities were weapons labs.”
A CIA analyst in Washington prepares a draft white paper that will ultimately become the official CIA view. The draft refers to the trailers as “the strongest evidence to date that Iraq was hiding a biological warfare program.”
5/25/03 – A team of nine volunteers, each with at least a decade of experience in one of the essential technical skills needed for bioweapons production, arrives in Iraq at the behest of the Defense Intelligence Agency. “Within the first four hours,” one of them relates, “it was clear to everyone that these were not biological labs.”
5/26/03 – Rumors of the technical team’s observations travel across the Atlantic. “A stream of anxious e-mails and phone calls from Washington pressed for details and clarifications.”
5/27/03 – The technical team’s preliminary report, reflecting its conclusion that the trailers were not bioweapons facilities, is transmitted to Washington.
5/28/03 – The CIA publishes its white paper, “Iraqi Mobile Biological Warfare Agent Production Plants,” on its Web site. The white paper bears the DIA seal.
5/29/03 – President Bush declares, “We have found the weapons of mass destruction.” He identifies the two trailers as mobile “biological laboratories.”
June 2003 – The technical team, now back in Washington, works on its final (still-classified) report. Many outsiders want to know if the team can soften its conclusions to leave open the possibility that the trailers were, in fact, bioweapons labs. “In the end, the final report — 19 pages plus a 103-page appendix — remained unequivocal in declaring the trailers unsuitable for weapons production.”
6/26/03 – Secretary of State Powell tells reporters that the “confidence level is increasing” that the trailers were intended for biowarfare.
9/14/03 – Vice President Cheney on “Meet the Press”: “We’ve, since the war, found two of them. They’re in our possession today, mobile biological facilities that can be used to produce anthrax or smallpox or whatever else you wanted to use during the course of developing the capacity for an attack.”
10/2/03 – David Kay, leader of the Iraq Survey Group, tells Congress that he was “unable to verify the claim that the disputed trailers were weapons labs.” It turns out he was not apprised of the technical team’s findings until late 2003. “If I had known that we had such a team in Iraq,” says Kay, “I would certainly have given their findings more weight.”
2/5/04 – CIA Director George Tenet continues to assert that the bioweapons lab theory remains plausible. Although there was “no consensus” among intelligence officials, the trailers “could be made to work” as weapons labs, he said in a speech.
September 2004 – The Iraq Survey Group’s final report to Congress finds that the trailers were “impractical for biological agent production,” lacking 11 components that would be crucial for making bioweapons. Instead, the trailers were “almost certainly designed and built for the generation of hydrogen.”
ppGaz
Proposed Confederate Yankee response:
Jorge
It does my heart good that there has only been one person that has come in here and tried to defend Bush.
Ryan S
He’s probably a plant.
Blue Neponset
I am starting to regard Bush apologists the same way I regard communitsts. On some level they must know they are wrong but so much of their world view depends on being right that they will never accept the truth. It is kind of sad actually.
The Other Steve
Or Baghdad Bob. Even though I didn’t agree with the invasion of Iraq, it was funny listening to Baghdad Bob.
The thing is… The Bush apologists are sounding more and more like Baghdad Bob.
neil
Since Confederate Yankee brings it up, I’d like to hear more about why the military inspectors were so wrong. Where was the pressure coming from?
The Other Steve
Ahh, some choice quotes. Tell me that many of these don’t sound like Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush or the 101st apologistas
http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/
“My feelings – as usual – we will slaughter them all”
“Our initial assessment is that they will all die”
“I blame Al-Jazeera – they are marketing for the Americans!”
“No I am not scared, and neither should you be!”
“Be assured. Baghdad is safe, protected”
“Who are in control, they are not in control of anything – they don’t even control themselves!”
“We are not afraid of the Americans. Allah has condemned them. They are stupid. They are stupid” (dramatic pause) “and they are condemned.”
“The American press is all about lies! All they tell is lies, lies and more lies!”
“I have detailed information about the situation…which completely proves that what they allege are illusions . . . They lie every day.”
“Lying is forbidden in Iraq. President Saddam Hussein will tolerate nothing but truthfulness as he is a man of great honor and integrity. Everyone is encouraged to speak freely of the truths evidenced in their eyes and hearts.”
“Let the American infidels bask in their illusion”
“We are in control. They are in a state of hysteria. Losers, they think that by killing civilians and trying to distort the feelings of the people they will win. I think they will not win, those bastards.”
“These cowards have no morals. They have no shame about lying”
“On this occasion, I am not going to mention the number of the infidels who were killed and the number of destroyed vehicles. The operation continues”
“Yes, the american troops have advanced further. This will only make it easier for us to defeat them”
Caseyl
Oh, if only. No, CY is a real wingnut. Kind of the poor man’s Tacitus.
The Other Steve
Doesn’t this sound an awful lot like…
“I can assure you that those villains will recognize, will discover in appropriate time in the future how stupid they are and how they are pretending things which have never taken place”
capelza
We could save even more money and have a puppy for President…”Free Biscuits and Licks for everybody!!!!…Woof!!!”
LITBMueller
Actually, Confederate Yankee, the Post went easy on Bush and the entire administration. It didn’t go into detail about the source of the “mobile labs” allegations, Curveball.
The “labs” may have been dicredited just before Bush’s statement in May 2003, but Curveball himself, a Chalabi/INC associate, had been discredited as early as 1999. He first went to the Germans, who didn’t believe the crap he was selling in 1999.
He was interviewed in May 2000 by a DoD employee, who thought that Curveball might be an acoholic.
That same interviewer happened to read a draft of Powell’s 2/5/03 UN speech and emailed someone within the CIA with concerns about Curveball and the veracity of his allegations, which he thought should be investigated “before we use the information as the backbone of one of our major findings of the existence of a continuing Iraqi BW [biological weapons] program!”
This email then got forwarded to the Deputy Chief of the CIA’s Iraqi Task Force. The Deputy Chief responded, very tellingly: “…let’s keep in mind that this war’s going to happen regardless of what Curve Ball said or didn’t say, and that the Powers That Be probably aren’t terribly interested in whether Curve Ball knows what he’s talking about.”
Ouch! Too bad the WaPo article didn’t mention this stuff! It can be found in the Senate Intelligence Comm. report.
Curveball was finally declared a “fabricator” by the CIA in May 2004.
Steve
Keep in mind, at the time, the government had drawings based on Curveball’s descriptions of mobile bioweapons labs. Then, guess what, we find two trailers that look just like Curveball’s drawings. Someone without bioweapons expertise could easily conclude in good faith that these are the mobile labs we expected to find.
It seems clear from the timeline that what happened is one of the initial, non-expert groups decided that these were, in fact, the bioweapons labs. And everyone went and ran with that conclusion, even in the face of dissent. So when an authoritative team of experts was sent to determine things once and for all, and they came up with the wrong answer, it was too late to unring the bell. Everyone just stuck with the initial, mistaken conclusion.
That doesn’t make it any less amazing that True Believers like CY still come around spinning it as “There was dissent! Nobody knew who was right or wrong!” Check the timeline again. Cheney was still repeating the claims about mobile bioweapons labs unequivocally FOUR MONTHS after they had been debunked once and for all. The fact that there may have been an honest, good-faith debate at some point shortly after the trailers were discovered is pretty irrelevant by that juncture.
Marcus Wellby
Please, people, Iraq is like so 5 minutes ago. It’s all about Iran now baby! Yee–huh pardners!!!!
USA! USA! USA! USA!!!!!!!!
Eural
The epitath of the Bush administration?
Vladi G
Great timeline, Steve.
Brian
Another yawner by Baby-Kos Tim.
And who has gone on the record about this report? No one. This will turn out to be another Lefty fart in a tornado, lots of excitement over what turns out to be zilch.
The purpose for the Iraq war was about much more than mobile labs. But when you have your eye to the pavement like the WaPo does, it’s impossible to see the sidewalk and where it’s leading.
Brian
There’s plenty of defense out there, maybe not for Bush, but for the war in Iraq. But why bring that defense to a pack of dogs that prefer licking their asses to something more nutritious, like truth?
Barry
Steve, I’d like to modify your timeline a bit:
“3/20/2003 – invasion starts.” My add: by now, multiple large teams of chemical biological and nuclear experts should be in Kuwait, and should deploy with the leading edge of the invasion force, for the obvious frickin’ reason that Saddam alledgely had ‘vast stockpiles’ of these weapons. Anybody who actually anticipated dealing with such vast stockpiles would have assembled these crews in advance. After all, it’d be too late to get them there in May – if the weapons existed.
“5/25/03 – A team of nine volunteers, each with at least a decade of experience in one of the essential technical skills needed for bioweapons production, arrives in Iraq at the behest of the Defense Intelligence Agency.”
A team arrives at least two months too late, if Bush’s reasons were to be believed.
Vladi G
Right, it was about liberating Iraqis. And about fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here. So enjoy your new found freedom, Iraqis, but try and dodge those bullets flying back and forth between the terrorists and our troops, none of whom posed any harm to you before the war started. Because we care about your freedom. We just don’t care of thousands of your innocent civilians die to protect our innocent civilians!
I have to applaud the wingnut strategy though:
1) Come up with four or five separate and completely incompatible rationales for war.
2) When one rationale is debunked, point to one of the other rationales as the REAL reason we went to war (see note below).
3) Repeat step 2 in an endless loop until your opponent gets tired of arguing/begins weeping at your stupidity.
Note – if one rationale cannot be resucitated, pull a lie out of your ass like “But EVERYONE thought there were WMDs!!”
Krista
Tunch for Prez.
Well, then why don’t you enlighten us, sunshine? What was the purpose of the Iraq war? It seems to me that the rationale changed quite a bit over the years, but I’d love to hear your take on it. So answer me this: why Iraq, and why at that point in time?
Perry Como
scarshapedstar, it’s hard work to destroy the world’s only super power from the inside. You have to give Bush some credit.
Davebo
Finally Jeff Goldstien is embarrassed enough with himself to start commenting under a psuedonym.
But the essence of the comments haven’t changed have they?
Slide
How embarassing. Oh, not for Bush, since most of us living in the Reality Based Universe already knew he was a lying sack of shit years ago, but an embarassment for the diehard, kool-aide drinking, moronic right wing that STILL expends energy defending the Liar in Chief. Its freakin amazing isn’t it? This mentally challenged group of delusional bushies that manage to find every excuse in the book as to why our dear President LIES to us on a regular basis. Shame, shame.
History will not be kind to the boy emperor. My prediction is that he will go down as one of the most incompetent, dishonest and unqualified Presidents that we have had in modern times. His disasterous decision to go into Iraq will be decried as a foreign affairs blunder of monumental proportions. People twenty years from now will deny that they ever supported this moron of a president.
DougJ
Is Confederate Yankee a spoof? He actually has a post up about “cut and run” Republicans. I thought spoofs were the only people who still used that phrase.
Otto Man
What is it with conservatives and the dog-ass fetish? You people are weird.
Don’t worry — we’ll all take your word that you have an awesome, kickass, superconvincing answer that would totally blow our minds. I mean, if you can’t trust a conservative’s word these days, who can you trust?
Davebo
One might ask how the administration has managed to get away with all this.
Well, one factor is that Many on the right are more than happy to take strategic foreign policy advice from Film critics. While totally ignoring experts.
Davebo
Slide.
Watch it. Because when it comes to the Mess O Potamia, your host falls squarely into that category.
Which might explain his recent comment blackout on these types of issues.
The combination of today’s news and a new protest being planned for this weekend in Crawford is bound to produce a Sheehan post.
The Other Steve
If Cindy Sheehan didn’t exist, John Cole would have to invent her.
SeesThroughIt
The nail has been hit squarely on the head.
Vladi G
Nah, we’d just get more posts about George Galloway.
ppGaz
Krista, how about Toonces The Cat for president?
The animal is pretty sharp, and can drive a car.
Toonces the Cat
Slide
No, actually, much to John’s credit, he has FINALLY seen the light as this post indicates:
.
Tim F.
As John might say in another context, few things make for better validation than being gummed by an angry wingnut.
ppGaz
Well, you should read Balloon-Juice more often!
Calling Stormy, Darrell, Brian, Don Surber, Macaroni Buckets, and the whole BJ Bushmonkey Gang!
You guys are falling down on the job, John doesn’t even remember your names any more!
gratefulcub
This has nothing to do with what the rationale for war was.
They were pimping ‘evidence’ of bio weapons that they knew, or should have known was false after the fact.
They got one report from non-experts and proclaimed, “We have found the WMD.” Do these people have no foresight? Can they not see outside of their idealogical bubble at all? Who in their right mind would take that information public BEFORE the experts gave some confirmation?
Remember, they never said that they found a mobile bio lab. They said they found some of the trailers. They thought that at least two additional, more advanced, trailers would be needed to complete the lab.
Anything they found that could be converted into bio weapon production was called “Dual Use WMD production components.” It didn’t matter that it could also be used for water purification, and it was found purifying water.
DougJ
This has nothing to do with what the rationale for war was.
So it’s okay to lie about it.
DougJ
Wasn’t aruging with you, grateful, meant to quote from Brian there.
Brian
Well, Ice Queen, you asked. So here you go.
America has a strong history of cowardice and/or failure in the Middle East, but mostly cowardice. Reagan and Lebanon; Bush 41 and Operation Desert Storm (didn’t kill Saddam); Clinton during both of his terms in office (“we’re going to find these perp’s and bring them to justice” when confronted with terrorist acts, but then never following through); and let’s not forget Carter’s famous folly in Iran when trying to rescue the hostages with an elite team.
That cowardice has given the Middle East (our friends and our enemies there) a belief that we will not use force in that part of the world, or ANY part of the world, when faced with a serious threat. Our culture won’t allow it, so therefore they feel immune to our threats of retribution or justice. So, after we were attacked, and countries like Saudi Arabia were continuing to support jihdaists while giving us lip service about being our friends, we were faced with a choice. Do we go straight into Saudi Arabia and deal with the menace being bred there, or do we make our point more obliquely? The Saudis, as always, believed that any threat we made would only be noise, and that we would never have the spice to attack terrorism in their country, or in their back yard.
The solution to this, and it wwas a ready solution, was to invade Iraq. After all, there were plenty of reasons to do so (countless UN resolutions ignored, for instance), and it would be a keystone of the Middle East, showing America’s firm resolve to take a stand and send a message. Another prop to support this action was WMD, which our intelligence, along with the intelligence of other countries, believed to be accurate. It would be a sufficient prop to sell the war to the world, because the truth (sending a message to supporters of terrorism) could not be told publicly.
Unfortunately, the WMD has not come to pass, at least not yet. But it doesn’t undermine the entire purpose of the war. The countries, friend or foe, now know we mean business. Let’s hope we can stay that way.
Davebo
Slide,
I guess I owe John an apology. And I’m happy to be able to do so.
Sorry John.
tBone
I took the liberty of fixing the typo in your original ass-licking post, Brian. No need to thank me.
The Other Steve
From msnbc:
God Bless GW Bush!
Let’s see. So far in the past couple of weeks. GW Bush has blamed the Soldiers for the tactical mistakes made in Iraq. The CIA for bad intelligence. Saddam Hussein for not leaving Iraq in better shape when we bombed it.
It seems like the only person GW Bush hasn’t tried to blame was the Whitehouse dog.
ppGaz
Well grateful, one wonders why they made this all so complicated.
Before the war, we had detailed intelligence about individual truckloads of oil being moved out of Iraq and therefore knew that oil was being sold out from under the embargo.
Why not call those oil tankers “Mobile Molotov Cocktails” which could be either set aflame and used as terrorist weapons, or, drained, cleaned, and used to transport bio or chemical weapon material?
Thus, “Convertible Dual-Use Truckbomb/BioWeapons Deployment Transporters.”
We had maps and schedules of their movements, and everything.
Which leaves one to wonder, why the obsession with truckloads of oil, but not enough information to know where the frigging weapons were?
Hmmm.
The Other Steve
I think you might be onto something.
What about Long Range Strategic Molotov Cocktails to describe the oil pipelines?
gratefulcub
huh? I would like to hear your thoughts about the saudi US relationship.
Cowardice? So, you ready to go to Iran? I think the Army is still letting people in.
tBone
BTW, aren’t you the same guy who read “Cobra II” (or “Assasins at the Gate,” too lazy to go back and check) and was seriously re-examining your support for the Iraq war a week or two ago?
I think the cognitive dissonance has rattled a few of your screws loose.
ppGaz
Uh, yes it does. The “entire purpose of the war” as described by its proponents in 2002 and earlu 2003 was to address the “threat” represented by WMDs. Not to create a comlicated and untried new strategy for hegemony in the Middle East. Not to “liberate” the Iraqi people. Not to “send a message.” To defend against a particular threat which NEVER EXISTED.
Clearly you don’t get that, and don’t care. But as you watch this administration’s ability to govern slide further into the toilet, and then the sewer, you can rest assured that the majority of Americans do understand it, do get it, and do care.
Now run along and bother some people who don’t know you better, you horse’s ass.
tBone
Sorry, my comment above was directed at Brian. Too many people posting at once.
gratefulcub
ppGaz,
We have heard for 3 years that the WMD were moved to Iran or Syria before the war. Now we know they were talking about Convertible Dual-Use Truckbomb/BioWeapons Deployment Transporters (CDTBWDs)
DougJ
Pack this one in amber so that thousands of years from now, people will be able to understand how the wingnuts of the early 21st century thought.
Sorry, Brian — you’re a good guy, but that was prime cut wingnuttia.
Steve
So why have the Saudis not rooted out the same factions within their own government that funded the 9/11 terrorists?
Why is Iran ignoring all our saber-rattling, now that we’ve sent an unequivocal message that the US means what it says?
I’d like to cash in my war dividend at some point, please.
Punchy
I’m sure we can find something to pin on Laura….
Sstarr
Thanks for clarifying why we invaded Iraq. I’ve heard we invaded Iraq to stop the production of WMD, to free the Iraqi people, to plant democracy in the middle east, to punish Saddam for conspiring with Al Qaeda, to prevent Iraq from being used as a base for terrorists, to draw terrorists there so we could fight them etc. etc. I had never heard that we were there to act tough. In a way, you’re agreeing with the lefties who say we are bullies. Interesting.
Anyhow, IF bullying was the reason to invade Iraq, it has failed. Our enemies appear to be anything but cowed. Last time I checked our military is completely tied down preventing a civil war in Iraq. North Korea and Iran know that they can misbehave with impunity. I don’t know if you noticed, Iranian President Ahmadinejad doesn’t exactly appear to be quaking in his boots…
gratefulcub
Why did Egypt promise to hold more free and fair elections, but never follow through?
Why did the Palestinians elect Hamas?
Why did the Iranians elect their own wingnut, that won’t shut up?
Why is Pakistan such a mess?
Why are the warlords in control in all of Afghanistan except Kabul?
The right wants credit for Lebanon and Lybia, but doesn’t want to admit that they may have some blowback on their hands in the region. Truth is that Lebanon and Lybia had little to do with the invasion of Iraq, and all of these questions have less to do with Iraq than some would think.
But, you can’t take the praise and ignore the problems.
SeesThroughIt
OK, so according to Brian:
1) We were fed convenient lies and half-truths as a rationale for war because the real rationale, according to Brian, wouldn’t fly. So it’s OK to have lied us into a war that otherwise couldn’t have been sold to the public because, well, it couldn’t have been sold to the public, so how were we supposed to get the war, then? And,
2) It’s perfectly OK for us to kill thousands of people and send a country into chaos and, by a great many accounts, civil war, as long as it makes us look like tough guys in the Middle East.
mazzy
Actually Brian, 10 Islamic terrorists were tracked down, tried, and jailed for the WTC bombing in 1993. They were all intimately involved in the planning of the crime. Ramzi Yousef, the bombmaker, was tried in NYC and is now serving a life sentence. You wingnuts always seem to forget that important fact. Clinton said he was going to find them and punish them and he did. I know how much you guys love to blame Clinton, but he did right that time.
Of course, we all know that Bin Laden is still running around free.
As a New Yorker, we know who has the better track record with terrorism, and it ain’t the fool we have in office right now.
Ancient Purple
And there, my friends, is the rub.
Those WMDs do exist. They do. They do. They do. We just haven’t found them yet, even though we occupy the country. In a hundred years, Brian’s decendants will be carrying on his legacy saying that if we just wait a little longer, those WMDs will show up.
In the meantime, Brian will keep his finger crossed until 2027 when the FBI files on MLK Jr. are unsealed hoping to God they contain evidence that King was a Communist.
Ancient Purple
decendants = descendants
Coffee hasn’t quite kicked in yet.
gratefulcub
but we don’t look tough. It appears that we can’t acheive successful regime change. We can kick someone out, but we can’t rebuild the nation. Iran knows that they have military power that Iraq did not. They have an air force. They have mountains to fight in.
More importantly, does anyone remember the 3 installations of the Great Game? That is an area that has spent centuries refusing to be slaves to a colonial master. The Persians will become incredibly nationalistic if we invade. They may not like their current leaders, but they will hate us more if we drop bombs on them. If they are nuclear……I don’t want to think about the blowback from that (read Billmon, he’s finally back, and all it took was a threat of nuclear war).
Iran is not Iraq. In iraq, we could use sectarian and tribal differences to keep the country in check for a while. We have had the Shia working with us for years (now that is over). Iran will not be like that at all. We will have to fight them all. Full scale occupation.
Anyone that believes we can drop a few bombs on them and call it a day is insane.
But, shorter Brian: Destabilize the region through invasion, or be a coward.
ppGaz
I wake up in the morning and I wonder
Why ev’rything is the same as it was
I can’t understand, no, I can’t understand
How life goes on the way it does!
(Nina Gordon “The End of the World”)
Darrell
Prior to invasion of Iraq, Egyptian elections were never even discussed. Now Egypt feels pressure. Didn’t they have multi-party elections last year?
Because they are extremist jew-haters. But that’s a ‘recent’ phenomena, right? Bush’s fault no doubt
Iranians have been run by islamofascist nutjob mullahs since the early 1980’s. Buy a clue
Prior to 9/11 they never helped us for squat. Now they are helping us round up terrorists left and right. Are things perfect? No. But they are a hell of a lot better now, than years before
Taliban has been expelled. They country has had successful election. If you want to spin that as a “failure” for the right because things aren’t changing fast enough, well then knock yourself out.. reality-based community is what you call yourselves?
DougJ
This Confederate Yankee blog is genius. Check this out
Now that I know that, I’ll never criticize Bush again. I thought he was deliberately undermining US interests — I thought that was his official policy. Must be all that Soviet propaganda I read.
gratefulcub
And, why do we never hear about it?
We are scared of Iran getting the bomb in 10 years, but Pakistan has it. So does India. If you haven’t noticed, they aren’t exactly buds.
Currently, it doesn’t seem all that important. They have a rational leader that is friendly to the US, and doesn’t want conflict with India.
The problems lay beneath the surface in the military. A military that isn’t quite as moderate. The president still wears his general’s uniform to keep support of the military.
I will stop rambling and just say that a coupe is not that far fetched in the near future. He doesn’t get many political points at home for being tight with Bush and the US. He isn’t popular for helping hunt for binLaden. (It isn’t a coincidence that the Pakistanis haven’t found him yet). Our new nuclear agreement with India has hurt his credibility too. His country sees him cozying up to Bush, and what do they get out of it? Nothing, while India gets nuclear support.
It is conceivable that Pakistan will have a new regime in the near future. One that resembles the Taliban more than we would like.
And they have nuclear weapons.
LITBMueller
Brian has laid out quite clearly the Beat the Crap Out of the Retarded Kid Strategy.
It goes like this: if you are a high school senior, and a bunch of middle schoolers are really pissing you off with insults and throwing rocks at you while waiting at the bus stop, the very best thing for you to do is to find the nearest retarded six year old, beat the living crap outta him, and let all those middle schoolers see you do it.
Then, they’ll leave you alone.
There are two problems with this:
1) Jihadists and those inclined to support them are NOT going to be all that impressed that we beat the tar (oil?) out of a nation we had already destroyed in the 1990 and had been under sanctions for over a decade.
2) Beating up a retarded six year old is REALLY REALLY bad PR. In other words, the rest of the world thinks you are a complete asshole, and a whole NEW set of middle schoolers set out to take revenge for what you did to the retarded kid.
Great plan!!! I see its working out well!!!
KC
This WPost piece kind of bothers me. I mean, it seems as if it’s written without really answering the question, did the president see that report? Without answering that question, there’s a little (miniscule at most) plausible deniability there, right? I have a feeling that in the future some enterprising journalist might do some follow up and the picture won’t be pretty.
docG
The right-wingers have been reduced to calling the iconic pillar of conservatism, Ronald Reagan, a coward to justify Bush’s invasion of Iraq? Can anything scream “lost cause” more loudly?
DougJ
Q: Why did the United States elect its own wingnut, that won’t shut up?
A: The United States have been run by Christian right nutjob mullahs since the early 1980’s. Buy a clue.
ppGaz
Seriously, John and Tim, unless you get rid of the Darrells and the Brians and get some respectable righty commenters here, your blog is being dragged down into ignominy.
Right now, BJ is about one notch above Scrutator in the comments section. Darrell and Brian are not even good parody at this point.
Who loves you guys? Take my word for it, these idiots have to go. For the right’s sake, I mean. Not for the left’s. DougJ on his worst day, hung over and just out of jail, writes better righty flonk than those guys are doing now.
DougJ
2) Beating up a retarded six year old is REALLY REALLY bad PR. In other words, the rest of the world thinks you are a complete asshole, and a whole NEW set of middle schoolers set out to take revenge for what you did to the retarded kid.
More pre-911 thinking from the moonbats.
kb
“Prior to invasion of Iraq, Egyptian elections were never even discussed. ”
well not since the 2000 elections anyway.
Brian
Hey, don’t walk on me with your “fuck you” shoes. You wanted to know my take on this war, and this is it. And it’s from reading voluminously on the subject from many different perspectives. You want my opinion, you’ll get it. If you don’t want it, then don’t volunteer.
If some homegorwn terrorists were captured in the ’93 WTC bombing, that’s one thing. But terrorists abroad are another matter altogether, and it’s here that Clinton (and Reagan and Bush 41) failed, IMHO. Terrorist groups do not respond to Western concepts of justice. They respect force.
I have read recently that Iran is waiting out the Bush 43 presidency. They fear him enough to wait him out until a more compliant person is elected, and the Middle East can return to dealing with an America that is isolationist and unwilling to fight.
You can’t just “duck and cover” the terrorist threat. But this seems to be exactly what many believe we should do.
fwiffo
I wonder if the Romans used the threat of elephants of mass destruction to drum up popular support for the obliteration of Carthage…
Brian
You love me enough to put on a Catherine Zeta-Jones mask and blow me two times a day.
Joey
But they were making progress in getting rid of the Islamofascists, and electing relatively progressive people. Up until we decided to invade Iraq that is, and then that went out the window.
Considering that the country is still run by warlords 3 years later, yeah, it kinda is a failure. And why is the country still run by warlords? I’m no expert, but I would imagine the lack of troops in the area plays a significant role.
Brian
And since when does Tim have any say over who speaks on this site? It’s John’s site. Tim is just given a key to raid John’s fridge and shit on his couch, and invite you pillow biters to play with him.
gratefulcub
Darrell,
Read the entire post, that concludes with: Truth is that Lebanon and Lybia had little to do with the invasion of Iraq, and all of these questions have less to do with Iraq than some would think.
As to your points:
Yes they were. have been for years, and they have been slowly moving in that direction. we just haven’t talked about it.
Sort of. They weren’t legitimate, and the most popular party was excluded. But, it is a step in the right direction.
Yes, but they have elected moderate presidents up to this point. the Mullahs aren’t elected. the Iranian people have always been more moderate than their leaders, and usually more moderate than the region in general. Currently they seem to be rallying around the flag, so to speak, to take a stand.
Discussed above. My problem is the powderkeg that could be Pakistan.
This goes back to the original point of the original post: too much credit is given for the good and too much blame for the bad. Not everything in the region is about Iraq. I don’t consider this a failure. The failure of Afghanistan is it’s desertion in 91, when it needed to be helped. The current situation was inevitable.
some of them are. Some of them are just Israeli haters due to a life of occupation. The hamas vote was a vote of protest. They have tried it politically, and it has gotten them no where. The average Palestinian can’t stop the bombers. They don’t see Hamas as a terrorist organization, the see it as an organization that feeds them and builds schools (they won the hearts and minds this way). Of course, some just want to destroy Israel. you shouldn’t group them all into the extreme bucket, unless you want us to consider all republicans racist homophobic bigots because some of them are.
John S.
Darrell Says:
Edited for facts in absentia and bigoted remarks.
Brian
This comment is borne out of pure ignorance. Ahmadinejad’s election win has less to do with Iraq than it does with the homegrown problems of poor Iranians who consider Ahmadinejad a fellow traveler.
tBone
Somebody should tell them that, then.
Broken
This “bio-weapons lab” disclosure is so Bush on so many levels. Nine technical and scientific experts on bio-weapons are brought in and decide the “labs” are not labs in 4 hours.
As usual, the scientific experts are ignored, just as with the aluminum tubes, just as in global warming, ad infinitum. As usual, the technical experts are proven correct about findings in their field of expertise.
Naturally, for the Bush administration, the technical experts’ findings are CLASSIFIED, certainly an abuse of the classification system, since this information could not possibly endanger national security. Evidently “classified” is now defined as information posing a danger to Bush’s political security.
Predictably, Cheney is still lying about the labs, four months later, claiming they were capable of producing Antrax and smallpox.
ppGaz
That’s right, Brian. Your “take on this war” is what we all want to know. It’s what gets us up in the morning.
Now, for something really, really unimportant: What is your “take” on what you are doing here? Are you like the court jester, or are you a lefty trying to do a bad imitation of DougJ … and by that I mean, really bad?
Do you think you are representing a righty viewpoint here? Because at this point, you are nothing but a foil for lefty scorn and ridicule. You’re like the Victor Borge of the place now, all you have to do is walk onstage and people start laughing. If you did those little “squawk” noises for punctuation marks like Borge did, it would fit right in.
Joey
Is that right? So the invasion of a neighbor for alleged WMD’s had little to do with a country that has also been accused of going after WMD’s electing a person who preaches the destruction of said invading country? But I’m the ignorant one…
capelza
In the non-political blog world…we call that a meltdown. I’m noticing it a lot more lately in rightie blogs and posters. It’s what’s left when the arguments and rationales have failed. I’m saying that nice as possible. :)
Darrell
yes, bad, bad Bush, relying on a CIA report with DIA stamp of approval. More proof that he “lied” as many on this thread are alleging
gratefulcub
Brian,
15 year old sexual humor and a double dose of homophobia and bigotry. Nice!
John S.
Brian you’re in good company with Darrell. Two little factually-challenged gay-hating conservative peas in a pod.
If you guys weren’t so homophobic, you could make a sequel to Brokeback Mountain.
fwiffo
Yeah, bragging daily about their nuclear program is the perfect stategy for waiting out Bush 43. Poking a trigger-happy cowboy in the eye is absolutely the best way to keep him from blasting the living shit out of you.
You’d think that if they were trying to “wait out” Bush, they would give him a little less material to work with.
ppGaz
Brian’s lecture on how to handle “the terrorist threat” continues at 2:00 pm. Meanwhile, cheese and lunchmeat trays are in the foyer, and you are free to form discussion groups on your own until we get back underway.
Smokers, please keep to the designated areas outside the east portal.
Joey
Yes. I love me some cheese trays.
gratefulcub
Read it where? Who were the Iranian leaders that went on record? Why didn’t they give their names?
Oh, my bad, those questions are only relevant if it is a Sy Hersh piece.
Bob In Pacifica
Brian, why does your definition of cowardice seem to require the proximity of oil reserves? We were cowards when it came to Rwanda, too. Cheney was a wussy little panty-waisted coward regarding the independence of the vast majority of South Africans. When was the last time we subverted or invaded a neighbor to our south (besides Haiti)? We are toothless when it comes to Europe. All this talk about French fries when we could settle things for real. China’s just asking to get its ass kicked, loaning us all that money. Why do we constantly bow to India? You wanna solve illegal immigrants? Bomb Mexico. A couple of tactical strikes will wipe the smile off those smug Canucks. And those jive-ass punks in the Azores…
Blue Neponset
I have a sneaking suspicion that Brian is a 15 year old who is fucking with us in between classes and during study hall.
Krista
Brian – so, in a nutshell, the main rationale for this war was to show the world how large the US’s testicles are?
Pardon me, but it seems rather childish. The US was attacked, and went after Afghanistan. You had pretty broad support on that one, and sticking with that, capturing OBL, and bringing him to justice would surely have negated any rumours of cowardice on the US’s part, regarding the Middle East.
So why Iraq, and why then? From what you’ve told me, it seems like nothing more than chest-thumping.
gratefulcub
There are only two places he could have gotten his knowledge of middle eastern history: Fox News and High School. i think you are correct sir.
Halffasthero
I think this comment by Eric Alterman sums things up very nicely everything involving this president, not just the WMD in the trailer:
The sad fact is this: None of the main news organizations are surprised by anything. They were well aware of all this dirt a long time ago. What you are getting is not news to them, it is news to you. That WAPO suddenly came across this information stretches belief. The idea that they were flagrant untruths and exaggerations that were told and are only now being “uncovered”, considering their resources, is an insult to the intelligence. There have been a lot of things that common sense told me was not right involving a lot of things with this presidency and, like an exercise in teeth pulling, the press is finally doing their job and uncovering it – correction – bringing it to the light of day.
Just my opinion.
Brian
Question for John Cole:
Do you want your site to be used for “lfety scorn and ridicule”? It would be nice for me, a daily reader of your blog, to know where you stand on this.
Do you ike the fact that your blog has been hijacked by a single voice like that of ppGaz?
Andrew
I’m pretty sure that “science” is pre-9/11 thinking. At least, that’s what Darrell and Jeff Goldstein’s dog told me.
capelza
Krista, I’d like to interject some seriousness for a minute. I don’t think it was even a blip on the US radar, but I have not forgotten the latest Canadian soldier who died fighting with us in Afghanistan. And his compatriots who were injured.
As for the “testicle” theory. In a nutshell. Some psychologists in some future time will try to understand this admin and Bush and their obsession with Iraq (way before he was even President and had all the classified facts at hand). Mano a mano…goes way back in Bush’s life. The rest of the country gets to play out his fucked up relationship with his father.
Andrew
Shorter Brian: Why can’t we have alternate points of view from the facts?
Darrell
Bin Laden himself openly bragged before and after 9/11, that the US was too weak to fight back if aggressively attacked. As evidence, he pointed out our lame responses to previous attacks.
I thought that was common knowledge.
Krista
ppGaz:
I did ask him for his take on it. You may ridicule his response all you like, but his response was not unsolicited. I was genuinely curious to see where he was coming from on this, and what he feels was the rationale for the war. The question remains as to whether or not the Bush administration shares that rationale of the war being a good way to show strength.
Thousands dead because the US wanted to display its cojones.
Disgusting.
gratefulcub
We sure showed him. He attacked us, we talked big about ‘smokin em out a his hole’, and then attacked Iraq with our Big American Balls.
Brian
Have you spent too much time in women’s studies programs? Everything’s “phallic” or “testicles” or manly “chest thumping?
Actually, I wonder why we didn’t take on Iran instead of Iraq, but maybe it was because of the human rights violations that were so obvious inside Iraq, or the UN resolution that Saddam thumbed his nose at.
If you want to couch this in terms of male domination and patriarchy, or mere childishness, that’s fine, for you. But the real world is about showing force when it counts.
capelza
And Darrell, do you think getting bogged down in Iraq “pwned” Bin Laden? Do you think that he isn’t laughing his ass of when he reads about the loosening of enlistment standards to try to get enough people to even join the army?
Blue Neponset
Darrell,
Our country did fight back against Al Qeada. I thought the invasion of Afganistan and overtrhowing the Taliban was common knowledge.
gratefulcub
No it doesn’t.
“The world needs to know that American says what it means and means what it says.”
“There had to be a price for ignoring the resolutions”
“Yada yada yada, we mean what we say”
Paraphrased of course.
gratefulcub
Pillow biter
jg
But what about them lying to us after the labs were proven to not be weapons labs? Doesn’t that bother you?
It was common knowledge that he said it. Are you saying we went to war because OBL dared us? Said we were too chicken to defend ourselves?
Brian
Staying with your “testicled foreign policy” meme for a moment, I think Americans, when pushed on the subject, prefer to have a president willing to demonstrate some strength when it counts. Even when we have a female president soon, it’ll be expected.
I think a lot of Americans would wince if they thought about Gore being president in 2001 instead of Bush. Scary to think about.
capelza
Hahahahaa…Brian. You really are reaching if you are trying to insult ME with the women’s studies crack. Really, that is too fucking funny. Of course it is, you dipshit. I didn’t learn it from feminine studies, but from working on boats where punching a guy in the nose was the best way to get him to leave me alone. Where who has the biggest balls IS the bottomline. Metaphorically, monetarliy, and emotionally and occasionally in actuality, but only after enormous amounts of Stoli.
Halffasthero
Actually that is true. Darrell makes a good point here. The attack in Afganhistan answered his misguided convictions, however.
On a side note, I think if Bin Laden is ever caught, they should let the NYPD interrogate him rather than the CIA.
Krista
Thank you, capelza. That’s very kind.
And now he has even more evidence in the fact that he has yet to be brought to justice. I’m sure that the war in Iraq has not dissuaded him or others like him. In fact, it probably amuses him that the US has diverted so many resources away from catching him, in its quest to flex its muscles in Iraq.
gratefulcub
Agreed.
Strength doesn’t always mean shock and awe.
A huge military buildup in the region coupled with dire warnings if inspectors weren’t allowed free access, is a show of strength. All the while showing the world that we don’t want war, and asking them to please stand with us to show even more strength in order to avoid war. That is a show of strength.
Many ways to show strength, you seem to only understand the Big American Balls approach.
Darrell
You seem enamored with such talk gratefulcub. Any connection there to the great offense you took over the Boy scouts not wanting gay scout leaders?
Darrell
This is a perfect example of why the left can never be trusted with national security. They love talk and symbols, but never action. It’s who they are.
capelza
Darrell, that was weak, even for you…
Brian
Yes, it does. There is much about Bush 43 that bothers me. The administration’s distrust of the media is so deep and wide that they go to shameless and sometimes unnecessary lengths to hide facts that’ll come out eventually.
The administration could have done so much better in this war if it was composed of people that could sell the war without undermining institutions like the media. I know that some will dislike my use of the word “sell”, but wars need to be sold to the people in our democracy. The president needs to get buy-in. And Bush used information to sell the war that was supposedly “a slam dunk”, but he could have used other reasons just as effectively, if not more effectively, reasons that would have not resulted in the fiasco over WMD.
Krista
But this didn’t count. That’s what we’re trying to say. Attacking Afghanistan and overthrowing the Taliban made sense. Everybody was behind you on that one. That was a show of force that counted, because it was purposeful.
Showing force in Iraq, from what you’ve said, was in order to show the Middle East that the United States is not afraid to show force. You’d already shown force in Afghanistan.
It backfired, don’t you see? If the US had stuck with it in Afghanistan and used its resources to capture Bin Laden and bring him to justice, then THAT would have been an effective show of force. As it is, the US has now shown the world that terrorists can easily elude the most powerful nation on earth, and has also shown the world that its military is stretched very, very thin right now.
You didn’t show strength by invading Iraq. You showed your weakness instead, and have only emboldened the next wave of Bin Ladens.
gratefulcub
We can’t out macho bin Laden and his followers. They aren’t going to lay down when the realize they can’t win. That’s why we call them fanatics.
On the other hand, if we invade their countries, their organization grows. It also transforms into a guerrilla operation that destabilizes the region more than a terrorist group that is smaller.
That’s why we need more intellectual firepower and less Big American Balls.
jg
Its also about accountability. While we’re kicking down doors and peeling turbans we’re creating an impression of the US in the minds of the Iraqis and other people in the Middle East. Any chance that we’ve stirred up an emotional response that isn’t respect or fear? If you were an Iraqi or person from the middle east or just a muslim, would you fear the US? Respect us? Or would yo have a whole different set of emotions and thoughts about us and our acts?
Brian
Your vocabulary is like someone who works on a boat. Not exactly a bastion of intellectual power.
But your example of punching bullies is apt, and helps to prove my point. But we’re also talking about world politics, not a Stoli-induced brawl on a boat. Dipshit.
gratefulcub
Probably. I was really just waiting for you to call me out for saying BABs repeatedly, but then I started to enjoy it.
I haven’t been worried about others thinking I may be a pillow biter in a long time. I will let you wonder if I am.
gratefulcub
Depends on who you believe the bully is. Are you really calling a small weak country like Iraq the bully, or a small group of men like Al Q. Bully isn’t apt.
But, let’s call AQ bullies. Invading Iraq is not punching them in the nose. They wanted SH overthrown.
ppGaz
Oh, dear, no. This is just a job. I do what needs to be done. If I were doing what I like, I’d be hanging around Italian cooking sites, or muscle car sites, or aviation sites and talking about airplanes.
This? This is work. This is business. We each have our job to do here. I bite Brian on the ankle, get him to miss a step, and then the pack kills him and devours his flesh down to the bones. It’s all business, nothing personal.
But really, at this point, he’s reached the absurd stage.
He is basically reduced to “blow me” dialogue, and you hate to see that.
Blue Neponset
Go say that in Norfolk or Glouster. I think Navy guys in Norfolk and the fishermen in Glouster would kick your ass up and down the street if they heard you say that.
Disrespecting sailors isn’t cool no matter how old you are Brian.
jg
Why? Please answer without resorting to crap like everyone knows the left is a bunch of pussies looking for hugs.
Not when they’re justified. We didn’t need to be sold on Afghanistan. We knew it was nescessary. Vietnam and Iraq needed selling because they were wars of choice and we needed to be convinced the war was nescessary. The reasons given in both cases were wrong (for different reasons). In the case of Iraq we were mislead, supporting facts were exagerated, dissenting facts were buried. You admit this happened and it pisses you off but you keep finding weaker and weaker reasons to support our fuckup. A show of force? It caused N. Korea to remove the seals and re-access their store of plutonium to build a weapon. Iran has stepped up production because they have to be ready in case we need to show more force. Its ridiculous.
capelza
Really it is no different than “cod-piece” Bush. I like my vocabulary, it is easier for you to understand. I could, if you would like, go into my university graduate mode. Lots of big words and history repeating itself, yada yada..but too much pedantry for my taste. I like shrill.
Halffasthero
That was a great line. I disagree with the argument but it painted a perfect picture. : )
/hat tip
Faux News
Ah Bob, now THERE is a statement worth bringing up. All this talk about North Korea and Iran is certainly pertinent. But what do the Darrells, Stormys, and RedState.com Retards like Confederate Yankkke think China is doing/thinking/planning while the US military is being bogged down in Iraq and God forbid, possibly Iran?
My guess? Probably not about the 2008 Olypmics. More like Global military domination. China needs that mideast oil as much as we do…
capelza
Well, maybe my way is best…let’s put Bush and Ahmadinejad on a boat somewhere out in the Bering Sea and let THEM duke it out. Mano a mano. Leave everyone else out of their cock fight.
gratefulcub
It’s the little things, like his Prescription Drug Bill Infomercials. I heard him this morning, “so, your bill went from 3 hunerd to 1 hunerd.”
New Rule, you must pronounce nuclear before you can use it.
Brian
I see your point, Krista, but Saudi Arabia (for instance) was still protecting the radicals inside their country even after our victory in Afghanistan. The U.S. going into Afghanistan had little bearing on our supposed “friends” in the region. It was a given that we’d go there after 9/11, but not a country like Iraq in the face of public pressure at home or rejection from the UN, which was happy to continue taking money from Iraq via the Oil-for-Food boondoggle.
We were faced with a bad choice in takig on dictatorial regimes favoring terrorism, and a worse choice of taking on the Taliban in Afghanistan and hoping that our victory there might prevent terrorists from planning future attacks.
We are faced with difficult choices in difficult times, and cannot afford to have a president like a John Kerry wringin his hands and requesting summits of world leaders to try and get consensus on problems like terrorism, where we would only receive the same lip service we have received from countries like Saudi Arabia. We need decisiveness.
Darrell
Well nothwithstanding the that Tommy Franks and other military commanders disagree that they didn’t have all the resources they needed to hunt OBL in Afghanistan (for all we know, OBL was in Northern Iran), there is still question as to whether or not OBL is even alive. And if he is, running from cave to cave w/his tail between his legs is doing nothing to affirm his “strong horse” assertions that he had previously used to recruit
capelza
Darrell do you have ANY proof for your statements about OBL? Or just wishful thinking? Just asking, really.
Steve
I truly enjoy how Brian invariably enters a thread with comments like “this will turn out to be another Lefty fart in a tornado” and “why bring that defense to a pack of dogs that prefer licking their asses” and ends up lecturing people for their vulgarity and unwillingness to engage in serious intellectual debate. It has yet to grow old.
Brian
That’s tough talk, pecker head. Like a guy who swings his dick around, showing how big his balls are, trying to win a contest of testicle size, or a pissing match with a well-endowed opponent.
What’s with you folks today?
capelza
Dude…a post of yours from October 2004 just showed up!
gratefulcub
Scotty Mac asked about the mobile bio labs
So, correct me if I am wrong. He is saying that it takes a long time before they can asses a study by the experts. A really long time, maybe a year or two.
But, when the military found them, and non-experts declared them to be WMD labs, it took a couple of hours for the president to go to the mic and say “We have found the WMD.”
Brian
Steve,
I have to talk to your level, dontcha understand?
Broken
Darrell Says:
yes, bad, bad Bush, relying on a CIA report with DIA stamp of approval. More proof that he “lied” as many on this thread are alleging
Broken
Oops bad blockquotes.
Darrell
Which statements are you referring to? Tommy Franks wrote a NYTimes article putting to bed the leftist lie that they weren’t given enough resources to pursue OBL because of Iraq.
What the hell are you talking about?
Brian
Isn’t it more powerful for OBL to be alive and ranting from hideouts, as compared to us, speaking as free people? I think it’s a marvelous contrast that can only help our cause.
fwiffo
This is so telling. All the various justifications used in the past were really just pretense, and now nobody’s afraid to admit that out loud.
We attacked Iraq because Saddam was an evil dictator who was oppressing his people. Nevermind dozens of other countries run by dictators oppressing their people.
We attacked Iraq because of WMD programs, nevermind all those other countries with WMD programs.
We attacked Iraq because of human rights violations, nevermind all those other countries that engage in human rights violations.
We attacked Iraq to spread democracy, nevermind all the other non-democratic regimes.
We attacked Iraq because they ignored UN resolutions, nevermind that nobody else ever pays any attention to UN resolutions.
There were asses that needed to be stomped and our boots were made for stomping. Bush wanted to attack somebody, it didn’t matter who. Attacking the actual people that attacked us wasn’t enough. We need to start another war and kill thousands of people just to prove we’re bad-ass motherfuckers. Iraq is just a convienient target. It was so easy to line up all sorts of pretenses.
And people on the right think that’s totally reasonable.
Darrell
can you lefties make a coherent argument without resorting to your simple minded caricatures and strawmen?
capelza
Blue Neponset…thank you. I’d really love for Brian to come to my fishing port and say that. Most of us fishermen and Coasties would beat him about the head with our college degrees and then kick his ass. Mind you, I m talking about the girls. God knows what the guys would do.
This is fun…I need another cup of coffee.
Steve
Davebo
Brian says..
Stunning ignorance dude. The only folks on the planet that detest Saudi Islamic radicals more than us is the upper echalon of the royal family in Riyahd.
And for obvious reasons. The radicals primary goal, above even destroying the US, is unseating the upper echalons of the Saudi royal family.
But hey, good luck on your Hulk Hogan in 2008 campaign.
Bruce Moomaw
Let’s see if I understand Brian correctly: the best way for the US to “show military strength” is to waste its military strength attacking a low-priority target, and then getting its military occupied there and unable to respond to more urgent threats elsewhere? Riiight…
Lest we forget, the reason the Bushites felt justified in ginning up the level of evidence for an Iraq nuclear program was that they (and Blair) were absolutely confident that the war would be — in that phrase sure to be remembered by history — “a cakewalk”. We could go in, turn the place into a stable pro-American democracy within a couple of months (after all, Chalabi had assured us of it), and then use it as a staging ground for similar triumphs in the other anti-American states in the region. (Lest we also forget, one popular pre-war slogan of the Neocons was: Men go to Baghdad. REAL men go to Teheran and Damascus.”)
As for the WMDs: just about everyone WAS sure before the war that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons. But the former are little more dangerous than conventional explosives, and the latter — for decades to come — will be vastly less dangerous than nuclear weapons. Numerous Pentagon officials have been quoted in the last few days as confirming that one major reason we can’t take effective military action against Iran’s very real nuclear program is that our military is stuck in Iraq — and, for the same reason, we’re helpless to respond to any crisis brought on by the fact that North Korea and Pakistan already have the Bomb. We already knew that the Bush crowd deliberately, and grossly, trumped up the evidence that Iraq had a strong nuclear program, out of their absolute confidence that History Would Excuse their lies. And now we have solid confirmation that, even where CBWs were concerned, the Administration felt it necessary to pump up the case by concealing some countering intelligence. Hoo boy.
(And — as Brad Delong keeps pointing out on his site — we can only thank God that Saddam DIDN’T have any CBWs, since Rumsfeld’s abysmal “military planning” extended to the US not even having any troops assigned to guard the sites in Iraq thought likely to be stockpiles of such weapons for WEEKS after our invasion. If he HAD had any CBWs, they would now be safely in the hands of You Know Who, and the Bush Fiasco would be considerably greater for us than it actually is.)
gratefulcub
Really? The leader of the free world said years ago, “dead or alive” “smoke em out” “yada yada gonna get em”. We invaded a country to get him. We invaded another country. We have hundreds of thousands of troops in the region.
Yet, he still releases tapes. Zarquawi is still roaming.
Do you not see how some in the region might start seeing him as a folk hero that the infidels can’t catch with all their hi tech toys?
capelza
Darrell…first off, it is in the NYT…you believe it? So you have to believe everything else they say, right.
Secondly, I hate to tell you this, but Tommy Franks is NOT going to go to the NYT and say ANYTHING else, duh.
I’m talking about concrete evidence, thank you.
Davebo
Slide
wow…. the right wingnuts are dumber than usual today and that is saying quite a bit. Once again, wow.
Davebo
Or perhaps that was his other brother Darrell.
Krista
And yet what strength has the US shown Saudi Arabia? None. They still continue to harbour terrorists, and are probably laughing at the US, because they know that it’ll be a cold day in hell when the US gets tough with them. Attacking Iraq was to show Saudi Arabia that you’re serious about fighting terrorists?
That’s where we differ. I think that the good choice would have been to take on the Taliban in Afghanistan, devoting all resources to stamping out the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in that region, and bringing OBL to justice. I think that would have served as a much better deterrent to potential future terrorists.
To make the choice of “taking on” dictatorial regimes favoring terrorism – particularly when those regimes have not actually attacked the US – is utter folly, IMHO.
There are numerous dictatorial regimes that favour terrorism. Is the US plan to take them all on, one by one? Maybe you think that if you invade one, the rest will say, “Oh, these guys are serious, we better stop it, then!”?
No, that’s not how it works. With every new “show of force”, less and less citizens are going to sign up for the military, and the troops you have will grow more and more wearied and stretched thin. Then what, the draft? Good luck instituting a successful draft in order to fight wars against nations that have not attacked you. You’ll have rioting in the streets. And the dictatorial regimes supporting terrorists? They know this. That’s why all of this sabre-rattling with Iran is not affecting them one bit.
The smart thing to do would have been to go into Afghanistan fast and hard, and wipe out all traces of Al-Qaeda, catch OBL and throw him in a jail to rot, and then get your arses back home to beef up the living hell out of your security.
Blue Neponset
Brian,
A little friendly advice. When you are waiting for your prom date to come down the stairs don’t talk politics with her Father.
Krista
I think it would be a bit more powerful if he were alive and mumbling in prison. But maybe that’s just me.
ppGaz
Fwiffo, you’d like the Tom Tomorrow version:
We attacked Iraq for all these reasons (a,b,c,d,e) and not just WMDs.
Unless we find WMDs, in which case THAT’S the reason again.
Darrell
I love this. Davebo calls stunning ignorance on others about a subject he himself displays extreme ignorance. The royal family is divided in support of islamic radicals. Some support them financially and others want a crackdown.
This article may help clear things up for you.. but I doubt it
ppGaz
Isn’t he a kids’ tv show over there, sort of a muslim Barney the Dinosaur?
Wolfman Jack
Hey there you groovy anti-war groupies. I hope you’re lovin’ life today in this wonderful country. Beautiful day, huh baby?
What do you say we kick back, turn up the volume, take a hit off that bomber you just rolled, and relax to the cool sounds of ppGazzzzzzz………..
Darrell
None? Well if you count a worldwide crackdown on Saudi ‘charities’, forced elections, and round ups of terrorists as ‘nothing’, then you’re immune to argument which doesn’t fit your dogma. Problem is outside of your reality based community bubble, people have to deal with details such as who would fill the power vacuum if the royal family were to be removed from power.
The Other Steve
Whoa. The wingnuts are really becoming unhinged here.
Broken
I see, so the fact that Cheney was still lying about the weapons lab “antrax and smallpox” capabilities, FOUR MONTHS later, is a strawman? Tell me how?
The report from the technical experts is marked classifed, is that a strawman too? Can your fevered mind dream up even one good reason it was in “national security interests” to hide this report?
Steve
I’m trying to imagine a world where President Gore fails to get OBL for five years and the wingnuts are all like “Osama is just a figurehead” and “Maybe he’s dead anyway” and “Isn’t it better if the world sees him living in a cave while the rest of us are free?” Not having much luck so far, but it’s an amusing thought.
The main difference between the two scenarios is that Republicans would have no compunctions about campaigning for the next few decades on the issue of how wussy Al Gore failed to capture the guy who attacked us. That’s one example of why Republicans are better at winning elections.
Darrell
I never said a word about Cheney. Like I said before, can you halfwits advance a coherent argument without an army of strawmen?
Broken
Evidently, Darrell’s definition of “strawman” is any argument he has no answer for.
Faux News
Even the RedState.com Retard Confederate Yankee fled after his one and only comment. He certainly didn’t listen to Rep. Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH) who told Rep. Murtha “Only cowards cut and run”. Thank God Darrell et. al. are still here hoisting the Neocon flag of victory over EastAsia
ppGaz
Via Kevin Drum and WaMo:
Yawn. That is so last year.
Brian
If by that you mean that we’re trying to beat some sense into you by popping your bubble, then yes.
Brian
ppGaz, imagine me quoting Pat Buchanan or David Horowitz. That is rather equivalent on the Right to Scheer is on the Left. I read him every week in the LAT, as well as listen to him to this day on my local NPR station, and he’s a radical left-wing as they come. He’s a helluva a smart man, but he comes with lots of liberal baggage. I don’t see the point in quoting him.
Steve
Well, unless your defense is going to be “Sure, Cheney lied, but at least Bush didn’t,” you might want to say a word about Cheney.
I understand why, when Cheney is out there four months later repeating the same old BS, you’d prefer to keep the focus on the issue of whether Bush knew on 5/29 about a preliminary report issued on 5/27. But Cheney’s statement does seem to call the administration’s good faith into question on this subject, just a little.
ppGaz
Uh, the relevant quote is Powell’s. Are you going to claim that he didn’t say what is quoted here?
What difference does it make who reported it?
Faux News
Well “trying to beat some sense” into Iraq has worked wonderfully, hasn’t it?
ppGaz
I can imagine you quoting Professor Irwin Corey, actually.
gratefulcub
I agree with you Darrell!
The saudi family is split. But, it is even deeper than that. The family uses all the resources and the house of Saud continues to grow. They have a very poor and desperate populace because of this, even with the vast oil wealth. They actually use Wahabiism and anti-US sentiments to divert the anger from them to us.
They allowed terrorists to operate in SA to some degree, but not unfettered. UBL had to go to the Sudan and then to Afghanistan. But, they didn’t really crack down on it. They feared that taking on the terrorists would cause a backlash against them.
The reason they are taking a more active role now is not because of our invasion of Iraq, they know that we aren’t invading SA (because of the vacuum you speak of). They starting cooperating when, and only when, the terrorists became active withing SA. At that point they were forced to deal with them, and they had domestic cover.
But, SA elections? That is a stretch you didn’t need to make. Voting is not an election.
capelza
Mixing metaphors? How does popping an imagined bubble beat sense into us? But folks who live in their own bubbles should float very carefully. Seems you’d have to pop your own first to get to ours. Or is some kind of bubble bumper car thing? Does your bubble reflect back on you from the inside? Maybe we aren’t in bubbles at all, it’s just your reflection you’re seeing.
What is the sound of one bubble popping?
:p
Mac Buckets
Oh no, ppg, you had him in your sights, right up until you shot yourself in the foot with this hypocritical bit of nothing. Have you forgotten that you are the undisputed king of the “Fuck You!” dialogue? You shouldn’t be the one to criticize other devotees of the form! Physician, heal thyself.
Brian
In your Lefty world of instant gratification, probably not. I think that history will look favorably on this war.
Darrell
Given that the official CIA report at the time of Cheney’s statement, blessed by DIA, (erroneously it seems) reported that the labs were weapons labs, then the only explanation could be that Cheney “lied”, right?
ppGaz
Isn’t there a children’s book called “Uncle Brian Pops The Bubble?”
I think it has an articulated Uncle Brian figure that the youngster can spin around and blow soap bubbles through.
Brian
You’re dating yourself.
I don’t know, but it probably resembles that of a popping testicle. Lemme kick ppGaz in the nuts to find out for sure.
gratefulcub
We are just a bunch of promiscuous pillow biters
ppGaz
And the explanation for why Big Dick hasn’t come forward all this while and corrected the misimpression? Is he just too busy? Did the hunting accident throw him off track?
Broken
I don’t by this crap that Bush or Cheney didn’t know. The team was sent over expressly for the purpose of confirming the miltary’s suspicions concerning the trailers. The preliminary findings are already in three days before.
Reminds me of Wilson’s Niger trip. Cheney asks the CIA to investigate the forged “Niger Deal” documents. They send Wilson. Cheney inquires how the investigation is going. Wilson gets back and confirms the existing conclusion: no deal. Cheney then claims he never saw anything to do with Wilson’s report. In October, 2003, he claims to Tim Russert not to have even have known about Wilson. Serial liar.
ppGaz
Did Dicky never speak to Colin? Is smiling for the camera all these fellows can do when they are sitting around the table in the Cabinet Room?
Brian
Close. It’s “Uncle Brian Pops the Cherry”. It’s a fun-loving romp with Uncle Brian, like Uncle Buck Henry did when he sat for Gilda and Lorraine on the early SNL shows.
Steve
Pretty much you nailed it, yeah. When the bioweapons experts go to Iraq and debunk the bioweapons lab theory in a matter of hours, establishing that the initial reports were wrong, you can’t go around for months still relying on the CIA report even if it’s still technically the “official” word. Not in good faith, anyway.
Darrell
And women couldn’t vote either. Fair point.
ppGaz
I have announced my age here many times. Nobody gives a shit.
Besides, if you didn’t know who Corey is, you couldn’t make that remark.
Actually, Corey made more sense than you do. And probably had better hair while he was doing it.
ppGaz
Hahahahaha. You made George Bush laugh.
Krista
Whose version of history? I doubt that your own will look favorably upon it. But let’s chat again in 30 years, shall we?
gratefulcub
Really Brian, how old are you?
I admit that my obsession with Big American Balls got out of hand, but I am a big fan of tongue in cheek campiness, it is a weakness of mine.
Broken
Darrell, OF COURSE you believe the conclusions of WINPAC analysts back in Washington over the unanimous conclusions of nine bio-warfare experts who have personally examined the equipment.
OF COURSE, you think the immediate burying of this report is entirely innocent.
OF COURSE you believe in the tooth fairly.
gratefulcub
And they aren’t going to anytime soon. Democracy and women’s rights are not very compatible with the islam practiced in many of these nations. Women voted in Iraq because we demanded it.
The story about the christian convert in afghanistan that was going to be put to death is telling. Their constitution says that they have freedom of religion. The koran says that once you become a muslim, leaving the faith is punishable by death. They were just following the law that they have obeyed for centuries. He isn’t dead because we stepped in.
Darrell
Previously there had been a lot of dispute over whether they were, or were not, weapons labs. Although I agree that the fact that there was unanimous agreement from those 9 volunteers in hours sounds solid, their findings at that time, were contrary to two (or was it 3) other teams’ earlier conclusions.. Is there evidence that Cheney was made aware of the reports from those 9 volunteers prior to his statement?
It makes no sense to me that Cheney would go on the record and intentionally lie about them being weapons labs if he knew that his statement would be discredited soon afterward
Ryan S
Iran has 636,000 sq. miles versus 168,000 sq miles for Iraq
Iran’s population 68 million versus 26 million for Iraq
Combine that with the fact that Iran has much more rugged terrain, a Much less sympathetic population, and a commanding position on the strait of Hormuz.
A simple linear scaling of the forces needed would probably not be enough.
Unless we carpet bomb them back to the stone age like we did with Germany or Nuke them like Japan, but such actions without them striking first would probably make us guilty of war crimes.
Blue Neponset
Do you need evidence of that? If the information is readily available then it is Cheney’s job to be informed about such matters before he talks about them publically.
ppGaz
Have you even read the thread? The report that “discredited” the previous view was locked away.
Faux News
As favorably as it did for King Pyrrhus of Epirus who defeated then Romans in 279 BC. Of course that victory came at a rather dear cost and resulted in a “negative outcome” for King P and his Krew. Yo.
gratefulcub
People within the administration were making statements about these labs for a year after it was debunked by the bio weapons team. Do you think it is possible that no one sent a memo to the WH saying, “have you guys read this report, you might want to.”
I am actually fine with Bush making the statement 2 days after the report was filed. I don’t really believe that he didn’t know about it, but I can buy it. But, as soon as that statement was made, someone informed the white house of the error.
This wasn’t some small detail. It was THE find at the time. The bio weapons team were the experts sent to verify the big find. Their debunking did not slip through the cracks of beauracracy. Do you really believe that no one in the upper echelons of the government asked, “Hey, did we ever get word from the experts verifying the bio labs?” It was to be their crown jewel, it was all they had, it was the reason Bush said,
“Iraq had WMD, We found them.”
Brian
The reports and opinions over actual or imagined WMD will continue for eons. It’s possible we will never get to the bottom of it. Regardless, the opposition to Bush would have continued even if we found stockpiles at every mile. In that case it would have been planted by the U.S., or something as silly as that.
Evidence comes out that there was in fact a Saddam-al Qaeda connection, and the goalpost moves to “but there was no picture of them shaking hands and Saddam handing OBL a missile”. No evidence is enough evidence to trump the position that BUSH LIED.
Broken
Dick Cheney, Jan 22, 2004:
Judge for yourself.
Pb
Darrell,
You don’t know Dick.
Broken
See the above quote from Cheney I posted. Dated Jan 22, 2004 on NPR. He either lies repeatedly or is seriously delusional. He doesn’t seem to care if he gets caught.
gratefulcub
7 months after the expert team sent to verify the find, had decided withing 4 hours of seeing the trailers that they were “the world’s largest sand toilet”.
So, yes. Cheney lied.
LITBMueller
Scotty McClellan gets in on the act: “APOLOGIZE, you damn media scum, for DARING to point this out!!!!” (via Think Progress):
But, here’s the real kicker:
Gotta love those non-denial denials!!!!
Brian
Saw this timeline in response to the WaPo piece. Might shed some helpful light on the story for those interested in a new perspective. Or, you can stick with the WaPo’s story (or, “version of history”, as Krista calls it).
Does it ever seem to anyone like a majority of the media is an extension of the DNC?
capelza
Jesus, boy…does it ever seem like you need a new slogan source. That one is so tired…not quite as tired as your Kerry references, but still yawn inducing.
John S.
Honestly, why do any of you bother with the likes of Brian and Darrell?
Do you think you will ever get through to them? Do you think that they will ever listen to anything any of you has to say? Do you think they are capable of hearing out another person’s opinion that differs from their own and then applying thoughtful reflection to it rather than ridicule?
Why do you people even bother, then? I mean seriously, what is the motivation?
ppGaz
Parimutuel Wagering comes to BJ!
Odds on who will be the last person on earth to still be defending Bush:
Darrell 3 -5
Brian 2-1
Barbara Bush Even
Check your totalizator board regularly. Don’t be shut out, place your bets early.
Darrell
I read it, and I naively assumed you were aware that the findings of that 9-member team did not become official until 15 months afterward. At the time of Cheney’s statement in Jan. 2004, the official CIA/DIA report stated those facilities were weapons labs. Furthermore, CIA head Tenet was saying the same thing as late as Feb. 2004. It appears that assessment was in error, but you have not demonstrated how Cheney “lied” or misled. Please come back and post when you have something more
gratefulcub
Brian,
That timeline leaves out the filing of the report in WaPo, doesn’t it?
At best, what that timeline says is that the WH didn’t know if they were bio labs or not (conflicting reports and all). And, while they didn’t know, they were saying, “We found WMD” and “I would deem that conclusive evidence, if you will, that he did, in fact, have programs for weapons of mass destruction.”
Tell me again, how is that not a lie. Maybe it isn’t as bad a lie, but it is a lie to say that we have conclusive evidence, when it is 50/50 at best.
ppGaz
It’s a little like setting fire to ants.
Facinating, relaxing.
Brian
Honestly, I wonder why I try to engage the likes of you in any exchange of ideas. If you’d rather I leave you to your little echochamber, that can be arranged.
Broken
That’s rich. A little while ago you were arguing that Bush might not have known before his speech, since the experts had only reached their conclusion a few days before. Never mind that the experts were sent specificly to verify that these were in fact weapons labs.
But to believe that Cheney, an obsessive follower of the intel feed, didn’t know about the report over half a year later? What’s your theory, someone inside the CIA classified the document and hid it from Cheney? Cheney didn’t know the team was being sent to Iraq? Funny how no intel which contradicted their conclusions ever seemed to make it to Cheney or Bush.
Darrell
Hold on. Are you aware that Bush doesn’t vet raw intelligence data? And Bush didn’t personally send in those experts.
There were conflicting reports, as at least two teams had previously concluded they were weapons labs. The head of the CIA was publically stating that that they were weapons labs. But Cheney ‘lied’ right?
Please tell us you have more than what you’ve presented so far
jg
But since people at Cheney’s level are aware of unofficial information they are lying when they give the ‘official’ version publicly. Lying for a good reason sure but still lying.
jg
The head of CIA lied to but that’s not who the discussion is about.
The buck stops where?
John S.
You haven’t engaged me, and I really have nothing to say to you. Therefore, there has been no exchange of ideas between us whatsoever, and I don’t know what you are blathering about. I prefer to leave you to your little echochhamber…
Hey wait a minute, this sounds familiar… Project much, do we Brian?
Pb
For those interested in timelines and trailers, a bit more detail…
Darrell
The head of the CIA was going around publicly stating that the labs were WMD weapons labs for chrissakes..there were conflicting reports which needed to be sorted out. But Bush and Cheney “lied”, right?
Do you people realize how extremist you are? You’re not rational and you’re immune to logic and facts. Hilarious, and ironic that you refer to yourselves as ‘Reality based’
Broken
Speaking of WMD, here’s another great Cheney lie:
Saddam Hussein’s son-in-law, Kamel, defected to the west in the mid-1990s. This is what he said about WMD:
This is how Cheney characterized Kamel’s statements on Aug 22, 2002:
Yep, it’s just lie, after lie, after lie.
jg
The reports weren’t in conflict. One debunked the others. The expert opinion is the one everyone relies on. It was hidden away while Cheney and Tenet championed the opinion contained in the ‘oficial’ one. They knew about the other one, the expert opnion, they chose to give us the other one. The one that fit the rationale.
Do you know the origins of the ‘reality based’ dealio?
Brian
It’s no more a lie than a Crest toothpaste commercial saying “4 out of 5 dentists agree….”. In this case, 2 out of 3 teams agreed that they were biolabs. Does Bush go with the majority or minority opinion? And why would it be a lie if he chose either?
This WaPo “gotcha” is as staged as that NBC “gotcha” at the NASCAR event using phony muslims. But sure, I can understand how you’d read it and think “See…..BUSH LIED”, because that’s what you want to see, and you’ve certainly been frustrated over the years trying to bust the administration.
Your types have no courage. Your Monday morning quarterbacking posing as political strategy is exactly what this country does not need. It needs people who are decisive, able to take positions that even benefit the sorry likes of you.
I am happy to drop in and at least give you a taste of what you might be ignoring, but it’s your choice to accept it. It’s probably why Conf. Yankee dropped in and split earlier in this thread, not because he’s scared away, but because he sees little benefit in sticking around trying to clean out the cesspool. He has the sense to drop in, leave a note of truth, and then promptly leave.
This place is a cesspool because it likes it that way. Darrell, Al, scs, et al come here to help clean up the crap, but the other inhabitants like ppGaz, Steve, Pb, etc. keep shitting into it.
Broken
Yeah, right. The report gets classified and buried, but Bush and Cheney have nothing to do with classifying or declassifying reports, now do they? Except when it suits their purposes, like with the NIE. Try again.
Pb
jg,
Also, all that trailer idiocy was debunked, practically as soon as it came out. What’s amazing is that there are still idiots around defending this archaic idiocy. As for the WaPo, it’s nice of them to finally report on this, but they’re still roughly three years late.
Brian
Then what the hell are you writing me for? Putz.
ppGaz
That’s right. Engaging your country in war is just like selling toothpaste.
And, you’re not a spoof.
R-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-ght.
Brian
I didn’t compare it to selling toothpaste, and if you really don’t understand that, then go back to sniffing your glue.
ppGaz
Whoop! There it is. You are a spoof.
scs, cleaning up the crap?
Get the fuck outta here, man. Seriously. That is just too rich.
I’ll bet you write her part, too. What are you, a high school class project?
Pb
I see that the ghost of George Orwell has visited us. Keep this around for future reference, folks–apparently spouting bullshit = “clean up the crap”; exposing and correcting said bullshit = “shitting into it”. Ignorance is strength, etc.
Broken
Heh, heh, presenting you Bush fanboys with actual facts makes this place a cesspool? You yearn for a nice clean forum devoid of all reality? Go back to Red State then and commune with the three or four other wingnuts who still visit that ghost town of the bloggosphere.
Broken
How is lying to the public to justify an invasion of another country “lying for a good reason”?
Steve
Brian had me fooled for a while, I guess, but let the record reflect that I’m finally onto the joke.
Brian
This is what you guys resort to when you’ve been sacked.
ppGaz
Oh, I think we understand you, Brian. Trust me. We do.
jg
That’s not the reason I was talking about. I meant because it was classified and they couldn’t talk about it.
John S.
I didn’t address you. I addressed the rest of the thread wasting its time on your stupidity. So the only way you could have thought I was addressing you was if you thought I was asking why you waste your time talking to yourself.
Putz.
Broken
Good idea. Let’s see what the report actually said. Not even the wingnuts could be opposed to that.
Broken
OK.
However, as we have recently learned, Bush and Cheney feel free to declassify whatever they want- when it suits their purposes.
LITBMueller
Yes we are spineless. This country needs more strong, decisive people, like you!
Locate your recruiter here.
jg
Your types are all brawn, no brains. No understanding that actions have consequences. You’re all about ‘take action’ without any thought to what your action will cause or if its the correct action, just go to it.
I’ll grant you that we needed to take action in the middle east if you’ll grant me that we did it in the most incompetent way imaginable.
Otto Man
Yeah, I’m sure the incredibly competent handling of the war in Iraq has really sent shivers down the spine of radicals everywhere. The administration went into Iraq to show the world what kind of power they had, and made it clear that they could fuck up a one-car parade.
Pooh
Brian says:
Ok, I admit, I made that up. He didn’t actually say any of that.
ppGaz
He was thinking it, though. I have irrefutable intelligence that says so.
Pooh
Undoubtedly.
The Other Steve
I’ve got a source named Crankshaft who confirms that Brian was thinking it.
scarshapedstar
Your types have no courage. Your Monday morning quarterbacking posing as political strategy is exactly what this country does not need. It needs people who are decisive, able to take positions that even benefit the sorry likes of you.
You should take up a position behind some sandbags in Iraq. I hear they need some help.
You aren’t too attached to your limbs, are you?