"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 08:25:05 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Scout" wrote in
message ...


"Winston_Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 01:46:08 -0400, Ed Huntresswrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 22:28:56 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:42:59 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 22:36:19 -0600, rbowman wrote:

Yeah, I'd seen the movie before. It was called Vietnam. Go in
with no
****ing idea what you're doing and hope for the best. Compared
to
destabilizing the mid-East, Vietnam worked out much better.

I don't remember you speaking up about your superior knowledge
concerning Saddam's supposed WMDs. Did you let your congressman
know
that the entire thing was a hoax?

Oh give me a break. Contrary was all over the place.

We sure didn't hear much contrary evidence about it, did we?

How does one prove something does not exist? There was lots of
proof
that the bogus information Bush made up to prove it did was
inaccurate.

Ok... how about instead you prove it was bogus information made up
by Bush.

After all, if there's lots of proof, then it should be easy for
you
to produce it.

Oh, and remember you have to prove he made it up.

Good luck with that.

Bush Derangement Syndrome renders its victims oblivious to Clinton's
1998 statement that he was attacking those WMD programs:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...s/clinton.html
"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological
weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its
neighbors."

"That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national
security
team -- including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the
chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and
the
national security adviser -- I have ordered a strong, sustained
series
of air strikes against Iraq."
"They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and
deliver
weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten
his neighbors."

Apparently he succeeded.


How could he target what didn't exist? Did he commit acts of war
based
on a deliberate lie?

In 1998, there was still reason to believe he had them. We had
almost
no information to the effect that Saddam actually destroyed his
weapons. By 2004, we had info from Blix's team, which should have
been
enough to give us pause.


Bush inherited the same secret intelligence, which supported the
false
testimony from Iraqi defector Curveball.

Bush's administration was making it up in a vacuum. It had been a
decade since Saddam claimed to have destroyed them. The intelligence
failed to produce an accurate account of what happened in the years
since.

--
Ed Huntress

You can't admit that you have been seduced by the Big Lie of BDS,
which numbly denies that Bush was following the path so clearly laid
out by Clinton.

Bush inherited and believed Clinton's intelligence failure. His own
intelligence failure, Curveball, was accepted because it concurred
with the existing assessment.
http://www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2013...s-about-spying

I didn't agree with his decision to provoke a war but I can see how he
supported it. The details aren't as accessible yet as the older events
and decisions that lead to Pearl Harbor and the Tonkin Gulf
Resolution, which I have researched. Those were also intelligence
failures exacerbated by hard-line opinions.

-jsw