WMDs and Bush - Lie or mistake?

Did the Bush administration lie about WMDs in Iraq or was the intelligence that they relied on faulty?

[bobman0330]

I have a question re: this poll for the people who voted for "lied." Is it your opinion that Bush/Cheney/Karl Rove/whoever failed to consider that their lie would become public after the invasion? Or do you think they just didn't care?

[hurlyburly]

I voted lie based on hearing Colin Powell's presentation of the evidence. I can't remember all the details, but I heard it on NPR. I really respect him. I could tell his heart wasn't in it when he presented the evidence, and wasn't comfortable selling the package.

I decided right then that if it wasn't good enough for him, it wasn't good enough. At that point everyone making the case for war started sounding like they were trying to convince themselves as much as everyone else.

Still, it's good that Saddam is gone, albeit 12 years past due.

[ QUOTE ]
I voted lie based on hearing Colin Powell's presentation of the evidence. I can't remember all the details, but I heard it on NPR. I really respect him. I could tell his heart wasn't in it when he presented the evidence, and wasn't comfortable selling the package.

I decided right then that if it wasn't good enough for him, it wasn't good enough. At that point everyone making the case for war started sounding like they were trying to convince themselves as much as everyone else.

Still, it's good that Saddam is gone, albeit 12 years past due.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting that you listened on radio and decided one way. I watched him make his presentation on TV and I decided the other.

Like a lot of ex-military, I don't like the idea of "gettin' it ooooooon." I watched Powell while he was CJCOS and developed a deep respect for him. He was given an assignment and he carried it out. That included listening to his advisors and trusting their judgement, then making the go/no-go decisions himself. He swore an oath, he meant it and he did his duty.

Because I respected and trusted the man, I believed the stories that he argued, early on, against invading Iraq. I know he saw the potential problems and the ramifications of making the first strike. I have no doubt he made his feelings known to GWB.

Then, the "intel" was presented to Powell. He's not stupid. He has sources/means to verify. He used them. My experience with intel, human and electronic, has been that it's not always conclusive. Interpretations are made. Disagreements abound. Consensus is frequently marginal.

Powell was, IMO, convinced the intel was correct. I didn't see any hesitation or attempts to deceive. I believed he believed what he was saying. And now we are where we are.

[vulturesrow]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
My experience with intel, human and electronic, has been that it's not always conclusive. Interpretations are made. Disagreements abound. Consensus is frequently marginal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish more people understood this.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My experience with intel, human and electronic, has been that it's not always conclusive. Interpretations are made. Disagreements abound. Consensus is frequently marginal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish more people understood this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think people do, that's why they don't like us making important (life/death) decisions based on intelligence when it seems close.

Regards Mack

[mackthefork]

I voted lied, in my opinion it was their only option to make this war politically acceptable, WMD was not the reason for war. The fact that there may have been various other good reasons for the war, and that they can just suggest that they always used them and people would swallow it is a good reason to believe that they lied and didn't care that it would be found out.

Mack

2nd question for those that voted for Lied:

What's your reason for believing that they lied?

[Roybert]

[ QUOTE ]
2nd question for those that voted for Lied:

What's your reason for believing that they lied?

[/ QUOTE ]

The Downing Street Minutes.

[kurto]

I'm happy enough to know that prior to 9/11, both Rice and Powell had said that Saddam was disarmed and not a threat.

Furthermore, I remember throughout the buildup for the war, reading numerous stories about our own intelligence agencies telling the White house that the evidence was bad. That was around the time when the Bush White House created their own 'second' intelligence organization who parrotted what they wanted said.

Third; the quality of the evidence they offered was so shoddy. The forgeries passed to the UN which our own intelligence agencies had declared faulty many months before... were so bad, that the UN declared them fakes within an hour. The mistakes were so bad; for instance, documents signed by people and dated, well after the supposed signer was already dead. That sort of thing.

Its no news that people within his own administration have reportedly said that Bush had been asking for a reason to go to Iraq since day 1 and that on 9/12... the decision was made.

The Downing street memos are just the icing on the cake.