[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Arraya: I agree that the intel was crap. I’ll take it one step further and say that the intel, regardless of time and situation, is generally fucked up and thus you have to operate off of what you have.[/quote]
Yeah, I understand this, Alan. However, I would say they were not concerned with weapons and they certainly did not see it him as a threat. I would also say they thought they would find some reminisce of a weapons program. I also think the evidence is clear that they manipulated the data to make the case. In other words, “cooked” the data. Also, it’s no mistake that 80% of the population thought Saddam was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks in the run up to the war.
America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
George W. Bush
Seriously, that quote is crazy talk.
To me, whether the intel indicated he had weapons or not is kind of a fake debate. I agree, they thought he might have something to hold up and say “Hey looks at this!” And *some* intel supported a possibility. But, that was not their motivation.
If he did have some weapons program, really, how far would he go if he started flinging Anthrax at his neighbors. Not very far. Well, if it was Iran there would be cheering in DC and Tel Aviv. His speculative weapons program was not conceivably a threat to the US. And after a decade of sanctions, what ever he possibly did have was incredibly weak at best.
I was just flipping through Chomsky’s “Power and Terror” in the book store today. If anybody’s interested in cutting through all the realpolitik concerning the middle east, this is a fantastic book for that.
