Why did Bush lie about Saddam being connected to 9/11?

[Lakhota]

The evidence is clear - Bush lied.

You have that in common with him, liar. You said he claimed al Qaeda was behind 9/11, you have no evidence for that because ... you ... lied ...

I thought "al Qaeda" was behind 9/11. Is that not correct? You mean Obama killed Osama bin Laden for no reason?

 

[kaz]

Stockpiles are irrelevant. It's the ability to make WMDs. If you supported the war for WMDs, you need to man up to it now and say it was the right decision to invade and stop playing political games for your party over your country. If WMDs are the reason, then that reason was valid.

I will keep it simple for you. 1. Bush promised no nation building in 2000 during debates with Al Gore. 2. Under Bush, a billion dollar green zone has been built in Baghdad so that the US "officials" could make unannounced visits to this green zone in a nation they "liberated" and built. if you need a link for either of the two statements, it is not worth my time to argue with you. YouTube George Bush you forgot, and google Baghdad green zone.

I'll keep it simple for you. I oppose Iraq because it was bad policy. We need to stop being policeman to the world.

You worship liars, who lied, and now you need to dig and spin your way out of it.

I don't have that problem.

LOL, grow up.

I respect your opinion, but disagree. I don't think being the police of the world is our problem, I think being the charitable organization of the world is our problem.

So why don't you follow the prescribed 2/3, 2/3 and 3/4 to make that Consitutional, I'll oppose you, and whoever wins wins. In the meantime, policeman to the world is not Constitutional. I have no idea why you want to do that, think it will work or is in our interest, but you have the right to believe that.

 

[kaz]

The evidence is clear - Bush lied.

You have that in common with him, liar. You said he claimed al Qaeda was behind 9/11, you have no evidence for that because ... you ... lied ...

I thought "al Qaeda" was behind 9/11. Is that not correct?

No, you're a retard with your hands down your pants.

Why don't you man up to admitting your thread title is a lie you can't back up.

 

[Lakhota]

The evidence is clear - Bush lied.

You have that in common with him, liar. You said he claimed al Qaeda was behind 9/11, you have no evidence for that because ... you ... lied ...

I thought "al Qaeda" was behind 9/11. Is that not correct?

No, you're a retard with your hands down your pants.

Why don't you man up to admitting your thread title is a lie you can't back up.

Fuck you, I'm watching my Patriots kick ass.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The evidence is clear - Bush lied.

You have that in common with him, liar. You said he claimed al Qaeda was behind 9/11, you have no evidence for that because ... you ... lied ...

I thought "al Qaeda" was behind 9/11. Is that not correct?

No, you're a retard with your hands down your pants.

Why don't you man up to admitting your thread title is a lie you can't back up.

Fuck you, I'm watching my Patriots kick ass.

You have time to post the above you have time to post "mea culpa I lied"

By the way Patriots is a hateful name. It's an insult to all the Tory families is New England who might like a football team to root for.

I suggest changing the name to Limeys.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Um...still no idea what you are talking about.

You felt it was unconstitutional. Your feelings are not convincing to me.

I didn't talk about my feelings, you did. I quoted the Constitution. Look man, if you want a girlfriend to hold hands with and talk about your feelings, that works. But it has nothing to do with me, try to focus on the discussion.

The war of 1812 was clearly Constitutional, Britan was conscripting US citizens into their navy. I don't see what that has to do with fighting in the middle east over oil.

I don't see what the War of 1812 has to do with your feelings about the constitutionality of the Iraq war.

Um...OK, gay boy. You're only focusing on feelings, you're a one trick pony. I'll drop out of the discussion with you now. Let me know if you have any interest in the topic at some point rather than how you feel bout it.

You're only focusing on feelings,

That's all you've posted as proof.
Try again?

 

[Faun]

Bush had trouble putting together two coherent sentences about anything so he left the explanation of the linkage between 911 and the Saddam to his minions but he did try. "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush said after a Cabinet meeting. As evidence, he cited Iraqi intelligence officers' meeting with bin Laden in Sudan. "There's numerous contacts between the two," Bush said.

The historical record pretty clearly demonstrates the distortions the administration employed to make the case that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. Inspectors who said they didn't exist were ignored, false stories about aluminum tubes and yellowcake from Africa were peddled assertively, Iraqi defectors that were known liars were used as anonymous sources alleging Saddam’s WMD development, etc.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States secretly shipped out of Iraq more than 500 tons of low-grade uranium dating back to the Saddam Hussein era, the Pentagon said Monday.

The U.S. military spent $70 million ensuring the safe transportation of 550 metric tons of the uranium from Iraq to Canada, said Pentagon spokesman Brian Whitman.

The shipment, which until recently was kept secret, involved a U.S. truck convoy, 37 cargo flights out of Baghdad to a transitional location, and then a transoceanic voyage on board a U.S.-government-owned ship designed to carry troops to a war zone, he said.

The "yellowcake" uranium transfer was requested by the Iraqi government at the encouragement of the U.S. government, Whitman said.

500 tons of uranium shipped from Iraq Pentagon says - CNN.com

This old story has been thoroughly debunked. Do you know the history on that yellowcake?

Q: Was it recently revealed that the U.S. found uranium in Iraq after the invasion in 2003?

A: No. Uranium recently shipped from Iraq to Canada was left over from Saddam Hussein’s defunct nuclear weapons program and had been in sealed containers, under guard, since the end of the first Gulf War in 1991. Claims that this material is "vindication" for President Bush’s WMD claims in 2003 are completely false.

Uranium in Iraq

Hey stupid, nuclear weapons aren't the only WMD you know.

Iraq had quite the stockpile of chemical weapons. In fact Saddam used them, on his own people - SEVERAL times.

Not in 2003, when we invaded, he didn't.

Of course he did, and what you think that he forgot how to make them?

Saddam was an asshole who had to go. Personally I don't know why we invaded rather than just killing his ass, but it is what it is. He was butchering his own people and threatening the stability of the entire region and don't forget , defying UN resolutions.

Now, let's get back to the title of this thread. Has Liekhota as yet admitted that his thread is a lie?

Bush says he didn't. Why on Earth would I believe you over his confession?

 

[SmedlyButler]

I consider this to be Bush's biggest lie about Iraq and Saddam.

Rightwingers like to distract from the event that Bush tried to link Saddam to - 9/11. Even the dumbest of rightwingers should now be convinced that Saddam HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. However, if any of them still think so - please provide credible proof.

I heard and saw Bush live on TV when he first tried to make this link. If there are any doubters - just Google "bush links saddam to 9/11"...

These days I tend to give Bush the benefit of doubt and think maybe he didn't knowingly tell a lie. I lean towards the other popular conclusion, the cadre of neocons he surrounded himself with, probably thru the the influence of Cheney, whispered the lie into his ear so often and so convincingly that he came to believe it. And without much common sense of his own to guide him it was just one more nail in the coffin for those hundred fifty thousand +/- dead bodies (they are still piling up) that resulted from his tragic shortcomings. I know it's no consolation for the havoc that continues to roil the world but it may in the grand scheme of history diminish the evil to a small degree that is attributed to him personally.

Irrespective of the reason we went in, Saadam was a dickhead who deserved to be taken out of power.

America has dealt with a lot of "dickheads who deserved to be taken out of power" in the last 100yrs. Why it picked that "dickhead" at that time is a question historians will be trying to answer for the next hundred yrs.

 

[Camp]

Has anyone explained what Bush meant when he said Saddam was giving aid and protection to al Qaeda shortly after 9/11 and after it was determined al Qaeda was responsible?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States secretly shipped out of Iraq more than 500 tons of low-grade uranium dating back to the Saddam Hussein era, the Pentagon said Monday.

The U.S. military spent $70 million ensuring the safe transportation of 550 metric tons of the uranium from Iraq to Canada, said Pentagon spokesman Brian Whitman.

The shipment, which until recently was kept secret, involved a U.S. truck convoy, 37 cargo flights out of Baghdad to a transitional location, and then a transoceanic voyage on board a U.S.-government-owned ship designed to carry troops to a war zone, he said.

The "yellowcake" uranium transfer was requested by the Iraqi government at the encouragement of the U.S. government, Whitman said.

500 tons of uranium shipped from Iraq Pentagon says - CNN.com

This old story has been thoroughly debunked. Do you know the history on that yellowcake?

Q: Was it recently revealed that the U.S. found uranium in Iraq after the invasion in 2003?

A: No. Uranium recently shipped from Iraq to Canada was left over from Saddam Hussein’s defunct nuclear weapons program and had been in sealed containers, under guard, since the end of the first Gulf War in 1991. Claims that this material is "vindication" for President Bush’s WMD claims in 2003 are completely false.

Uranium in Iraq

Hey stupid, nuclear weapons aren't the only WMD you know.

Iraq had quite the stockpile of chemical weapons. In fact Saddam used them, on his own people - SEVERAL times.

Not in 2003, when we invaded, he didn't.

Of course he did, and what you think that he forgot how to make them?

Saddam was an asshole who had to go. Personally I don't know why we invaded rather than just killing his ass, but it is what it is. He was butchering his own people and threatening the stability of the entire region and don't forget , defying UN resolutions.

Now, let's get back to the title of this thread. Has Liekhota as yet admitted that his thread is a lie?

Bush says he didn't. Why on Earth would I believe you over his confession?

Bush said he didn't what?

 

[rdean]

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs"Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Hmmmmm Hilary thought Saddam aided al Qaeda...
As did the above if you want to use Google and find this web site:
Reasons for War Things you might have forgotten about Iraq.

Regardless of the rhetoric, Bush was the only one who invaded Iraq. And he did it from ignorance. Not from study, research or with careful planning. Just brute force. The kind an ignoramus uses.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs"Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Hmmmmm Hilary thought Saddam aided al Qaeda...
As did the above if you want to use Google and find this web site:
Reasons for War Things you might have forgotten about Iraq.

Regardless of the rhetoric, Bush was the only one who invaded Iraq. And he did it from ignorance. Not from study, research or with careful planning. Just brute force. The kind an ignoramus uses.

It may have been Bush's call, but PLENTY of people on both sides of the aisle agreed with that call at the time Dean, you don't get to rewrite history here.

And where is Liekhota to admit his lie?

 

[Faun]

This old story has been thoroughly debunked. Do you know the history on that yellowcake?

Q: Was it recently revealed that the U.S. found uranium in Iraq after the invasion in 2003?

A: No. Uranium recently shipped from Iraq to Canada was left over from Saddam Hussein’s defunct nuclear weapons program and had been in sealed containers, under guard, since the end of the first Gulf War in 1991. Claims that this material is "vindication" for President Bush’s WMD claims in 2003 are completely false.

Uranium in Iraq

Hey stupid, nuclear weapons aren't the only WMD you know.

Iraq had quite the stockpile of chemical weapons. In fact Saddam used them, on his own people - SEVERAL times.

Not in 2003, when we invaded, he didn't.

Of course he did, and what you think that he forgot how to make them?

Saddam was an asshole who had to go. Personally I don't know why we invaded rather than just killing his ass, but it is what it is. He was butchering his own people and threatening the stability of the entire region and don't forget , defying UN resolutions.

Now, let's get back to the title of this thread. Has Liekhota as yet admitted that his thread is a lie?

Bush says he didn't. Why on Earth would I believe you over his confession?

Bush said he didn't what?

Iraq didn't have the WMD for which he invaded in 2003.

 

[SmedlyButler]

I consider this to be Bush's biggest lie about Iraq and Saddam.

Rightwingers like to distract from the event that Bush tried to link Saddam to - 9/11. Even the dumbest of rightwingers should now be convinced that Saddam HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. However, if any of them still think so - please provide credible proof.

I heard and saw Bush live on TV when he first tried to make this link. If there are any doubters - just Google "bush links saddam to 9/11"...

These days I tend to give Bush the benefit of doubt and think maybe he didn't knowingly tell a lie. I lean towards the other popular conclusion, the cadre of neocons he surrounded himself with, probably thru the the influence of Cheney, whispered the lie into his ear so often and so convincingly that he came to believe it. And without much common sense of his own to guide him it was just one more nail in the coffin for those hundred fifty thousand +/- dead bodies (they are still piling up) that resulted from his tragic shortcomings. I know it's no consolation for the havoc that continues to roil the world but it may in the grand scheme of history diminish the evil to a small degree that is attributed to him personally.

Is there even a remote chance that they believed it? Remember the troops and their gas mask and anti-chemical warfare equipment? Remember the Kurds being gassed by Saddam? Remember Hillary saying almost exactly the same words as Bush? I think we all believed Saddam had WMD and he did.

First, no we didn't all believe Saddam had WMD. There were lots of us pre-war who doubted the neocon propaganda. Even most of the Bushies finally conceded that the "intelligence" had been wrong and Iraq had no WMD. I could give you many Youtube videos of them (even Rumsfeld) in the flesh saying so. And as to that intelligence lets have a look at one way in one instance it was used and abused. Colin Powell in his U.N. speech is a good example. Although I admired him a lot, and still do in some sense, he "embellished" evidence to the point where, sad to say, it became a lie.

This is from Bob Woodward's book detailing what went on in the administration in the lead up to war. He describes Powell's use of intelligence intercepts of Iraqi military communiques. The intercept in question was one from Iraqi command to an officer in the field. The key passage was;

"And we sent you a message to inspect the scrap areas and the abandoned areas."

When Powell presented it to the U.N. it became;

"And we sent you a message yesterday to clean out all of the areas, the scrap areas, the abandoned areas. Make sure there is nothing there.''

Evidence that was neutral, or could even be interpreted in favor of the Iraqi denial of WMD became, with the underlined words added by Powell, damning evidence against Saddam.

Before the speech the State Department's intelligence team (INR) vetted it and gave Powell a memorandum. They directly contradicted Powell on the aluminum tubes and warned him many of his claims were "weak," "not credible" or "highly questionable." For instance;

At the U.N. Powell said;

"We know from sources that a missile brigade outside Baghdad was disbursing rocket launchers and warheads containing biological warfare agents to various locations, distributing them to various locations in western Iraq."

But before his U.N. presentation INR had warned him;

"last bullet. WEAK. Missiles with biological warheads reportedly dispersed. This would be somewhat true in terms of short-range missiles with conventional warheads, but is questionable in terms of longer-range missiles or biological warheads".

There are many of these instances of Powell going well beyond what his own intelligence people would approve. Here's another involving a satellite recognizance photo, Powell described it like this;

"The two arrows indicate the presence of sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions...
The truck you [...] see is a signature item. It's a decontamination vehicle in case something goes wrong."

Again INR had advised him against using this interpretation;

"***/WEAK. We support much of this discussion, but we note that decontamination vehicles--cited several times in the text--are water trucks that can have legitimate uses..."
"...Iraq has given UNMOVIC what may be a plausible account for this activity--?that this was an exercise involving the movement of conventional explosives; presence of a fire safety truck (water truck, which could also be used as a decontamination vehicle) is common in such an event".

As I said there were many, many of these points of contention between Powell and INR. It's hard not to conclude that much of Powell's presentation amounted to lies because of so much manipulation and distortion of the "evidence". He really played fast and loose with the truth, like a rogue Prosecutor. And this was such a common administration tactic in the drum-beat for war it wasn't just a once-in-awhile thing, it was strategy. In this case Powell, the good soldier, sacrificed his honor for his Commander in Chief.

 

[Tuatara]

So, why then has there been no charges against Bush for war crimes? Go ahead.

What is your theory?

Is it because the UN loves the Bush family?

Well, I am waiting.

Please do not give me the rightwinger thing. Where he claims the reason is the world did not want to prolong the scandal.

Yes, he said the reason obama did not push an investigation was because he did not want to drag the country any further. So, that means according to a moron like rightwinger obama simply let him get away with genocide and mass murder and high war crimes.

LOL at liberals.

The United States are not members of the ICC (International Criminal Court) which has stated that Bush and Co. would be brought up on war crimes and as for the UN the "United States threatened to use its Security Council veto to block renewal of the mandates of several United Nations peacekeeping operations, unless the Security Council agreed to permanently exempt U.S. nationals from the Court's jurisdiction."

Has anyone bothered to check our Constitution about where the ultimate decision for our country to go to war has to come from? It is not the President or the Vice President. You fill in the blanks. When the "witch hunt" begins, we need someone (an accuser preferably) to provide us with a rock solid definition of "weapons of mass destruction". Obama called the bombs used in Boston WMDs. So, what were SCUD missiles, for example? Let's go back to Jimmy Carter and his fiasco as president. What about Abe Lincoln and his abuse of the Constitution in the war of northern aggression? War Crimes? Really? Is this yet another attempt to hide the CURRENT crimes on humanity over the past 4 years? More smoke and mirrors or slight of hand maneuvers?

It is interesting that Bush would be prosecuted for war crimes when Kofi Anan told the UN to stand down in Ruwanda (an act for which he offered no more than an apology for later on as did CFR Clinton who refused American help to stop the genocide) while the Hutu hacked nearly a million Tutsi's to death in 100 days largely with government provided machetes and home made clubs with nails in them.

The genocide which could have been prevented with UN intervention proceeded unabated until rebel Tutsi's fought their way back into the country and stopped themselves while their fellow tribe members in Ruwanda had been disarmed by the government that armed the Hutu's with their weapons of mass destruction.

Yet Kofi Anan has never been prosecuted nor even publicly censured by the UN who as the article above points out used UN Resolution violations to justify his invasion of Iraq.

And now this criminal organization created primarily by the CFR and provided the land for its present world headquarters on American soil by David C. Rockefeller and his family. Meanwhile, Rockefeller is the Honorary Chairman of the CFR to whom Clarke is a trusted senior advisor.

The whole disclosure is as crooked as American Presidential elections in recent years have been and should be taken with a great deal of skepticism and seen for the deception it is.

Never mind, wake me up when they get to the trials against Bush.

So we have given up on the argument for Bush and moved on to Kofi Anan, Rwanda and the UN. Thanks for playing.

Oh, there is a trial for the "genocide" Bush took part in? No? Thought not.

All we have done is show what sort of hypocrite every fucking liberal scumbag is.

Did I say that? No. So you're dishonest and you've resorted to profanity and namecalling. The last resort of someone who has been beaten.

 

[Tuatara]

Condoleezza Rice - We Didn't Tie Saddam to 9/11

Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq

​

Liekhota, have you yet admitted that Bush never claimed that Iraq was connected to 9/11?

You're done

Administration Quotes Linking 9 11 to Iraq

 

[The Rabbi]

Condoleezza Rice - We Didn't Tie Saddam to 9/11

Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq

​

Liekhota, have you yet admitted that Bush never claimed that Iraq was connected to 9/11?

You're done

Administration Quotes Linking 9 11 to Iraq

Democratic Underground is a fail, s0n.

 

[Freewill]

Condoleezza Rice - We Didn't Tie Saddam to 9/11

Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq

​

Liekhota, have you yet admitted that Bush never claimed that Iraq was connected to 9/11?

You're done

Administration Quotes Linking 9 11 to Iraq

If you read through the quotes not one, that I saw, made that direct connection. A connection to al Qaeda yes, to 9/11 no.

WikiLeaks: The Iraq-Al Qaeda Connection Confirmed, Again

A former Guantanamo detainee “was identified as an Iraqi intelligence officer who relocated to Afghanistan (AF) in 1998 where he served as a senior Taliban Intelligence Directorate officer in Mazar-E-Sharif,” according to a recently leaked assessment written by American intelligence analysts. The former detainee, an Iraqi named Jawad Jabber Sadkhan, “admittedly forged official documents and reportedly provided liaison between the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq.”

Sadkhan’s al Qaeda ties reached all the way to Osama bin Laden, according to the intelligence assessment. He reportedly received money from Osama bin Laden both before and after the September 11 attacks.

 

[Freewill]

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs"Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Hmmmmm Hilary thought Saddam aided al Qaeda...
As did the above if you want to use Google and find this web site:
Reasons for War Things you might have forgotten about Iraq.

Regardless of the rhetoric, Bush was the only one who invaded Iraq. And he did it from ignorance. Not from study, research or with careful planning. Just brute force. The kind an ignoramus uses.

Please explain both Hillary's and Kerry's vote for war. Do you think that Hillary with her insider information didn't know what she was talking about? Are you going to hold your nose and vote for her any way? Of course you will. Saying that Bush acted alone is BS, he went to Congress and they said YES. You know all of this but damn be the facts.

Now Clinton terror bombing Serbia for 72 days, he definitely acted alone. Same with the regime change in Libya and now Syria.

 

[healthmyths]

I consider this to be Bush's biggest lie about Iraq and Saddam.

Rightwingers like to distract from the event that Bush tried to link Saddam to - 9/11. Even the dumbest of rightwingers should now be convinced that Saddam HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. However, if any of them still think so - please provide credible proof.

I heard and saw Bush live on TV when he first tried to make this link. If there are any doubters - just Google "bush links saddam to 9/11"...

These days I tend to give Bush the benefit of doubt and think maybe he didn't knowingly tell a lie. I lean towards the other popular conclusion, the cadre of neocons he surrounded himself with, probably thru the the influence of Cheney, whispered the lie into his ear so often and so convincingly that he came to believe it. And without much common sense of his own to guide him it was just one more nail in the coffin for those hundred fifty thousand +/- dead bodies (they are still piling up) that resulted from his tragic shortcomings. I know it's no consolation for the havoc that continues to roil the world but it may in the grand scheme of history diminish the evil to a small degree that is attributed to him personally.

Is there even a remote chance that they believed it? Remember the troops and their gas mask and anti-chemical warfare equipment? Remember the Kurds being gassed by Saddam? Remember Hillary saying almost exactly the same words as Bush? I think we all believed Saddam had WMD and he did.

First, no we didn't all believe Saddam had WMD. There were lots of us pre-war who doubted the neocon propaganda. Even most of the Bushies finally conceded that the "intelligence" had been wrong and Iraq had no WMD. I could give you many Youtube videos of them (even Rumsfeld) in the flesh saying so. And as to that intelligence lets have a look at one way in one instance it was used and abused. Colin Powell in his U.N. speech is a good example. Although I admired him a lot, and still do in some sense, he "embellished" evidence to the point where, sad to say, it became a lie.

This is from Bob Woodward's book detailing what went on in the administration in the lead up to war. He describes Powell's use of intelligence intercepts of Iraqi military communiques. The intercept in question was one from Iraqi command to an officer in the field. The key passage was;

"And we sent you a message to inspect the scrap areas and the abandoned areas."

When Powell presented it to the U.N. it became;

"And we sent you a message yesterday to clean out all of the areas, the scrap areas, the abandoned areas. Make sure there is nothing there.''

Evidence that was neutral, or could even be interpreted in favor of the Iraqi denial of WMD became, with the underlined words added by Powell, damning evidence against Saddam.

Before the speech the State Department's intelligence team (INR) vetted it and gave Powell a memorandum. They directly contradicted Powell on the aluminum tubes and warned him many of his claims were "weak," "not credible" or "highly questionable." For instance;

At the U.N. Powell said;

"We know from sources that a missile brigade outside Baghdad was disbursing rocket launchers and warheads containing biological warfare agents to various locations, distributing them to various locations in western Iraq."

But before his U.N. presentation INR had warned him;

"last bullet. WEAK. Missiles with biological warheads reportedly dispersed. This would be somewhat true in terms of short-range missiles with conventional warheads, but is questionable in terms of longer-range missiles or biological warheads".

There are many of these instances of Powell going well beyond what his own intelligence people would approve. Here's another involving a satellite recognizance photo, Powell described it like this;

"The two arrows indicate the presence of sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions...
The truck you [...] see is a signature item. It's a decontamination vehicle in case something goes wrong."

Again INR had advised him against using this interpretation;

"***/WEAK. We support much of this discussion, but we note that decontamination vehicles--cited several times in the text--are water trucks that can have legitimate uses..."
"...Iraq has given UNMOVIC what may be a plausible account for this activity--?that this was an exercise involving the movement of conventional explosives; presence of a fire safety truck (water truck, which could also be used as a decontamination vehicle) is common in such an event".

As I said there were many, many of these points of contention between Powell and INR. It's hard not to conclude that much of Powell's presentation amounted to lies because of so much manipulation and distortion of the "evidence". He really played fast and loose with the truth, like a rogue Prosecutor. And this was such a common administration tactic in the drum-beat for war it wasn't just a once-in-awhile thing, it was strategy. In this case Powell, the good soldier, sacrificed his honor for his Commander in Chief.

Well Saddam convinced everyone he had WMDs.
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
The sanctions were imposed by the Security Council after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990. Led by the United States, the Council has rejected many Iraqi appeals to lift the restrictions, which have crippled the economy, until Iraq accounts for all its weapons of mass destruction and United Nations inspectors can certify that they have been destroyed in accordance with several Council resolutions.

Recent revelations about significant secret biological and chemical weapons programs have set back any chances of an early end of sanctions.
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children U.N. Reports - New York Times

Then from Saddam's own mouth...

Piro, in his first television interview, relays this and other revelations to 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley this Sunday, Jan. 27,2008, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

Piro spent almost seven months debriefing Saddam in a plan based on winning his confidence by convincing him that Piro was an important envoy who answered to President Bush. This and being Saddam's sole provider of items like writing materials and toiletries made the toppled Iraqi president open up to Piro, a Lebanese-American and one of the few FBI agents who spoke Arabic.

"He told me he initially miscalculated... President Bush?s intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998...a four-day aerial attack," says Piro. "He survived that one and he was willing to accept that type of attack." "He didn't believe the U.S. would invade?" asks Pelley, "No, not initially," answers Piro.

Once the invasion was certain, says Piro, Saddam asked his generals if they could hold the invaders for two weeks. "And at that point, it would go into what he called the secret war," Piro tells Pelley. But Piro isn't convinced that the insurgency was Saddam's plan. "Well, he would like to take credit for the insurgency," says Piro.

Saddam still wouldn't admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there would be military action against him because of the perception he did. Because, says Piro, "For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that [faking having the weapons] would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq," he tells Pelley.

He also intended and had the wherewithal to restart the weapons program. "Saddam] still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there," says Piro. "He wanted to pursue all of WMDs to reconstitute his entire WMD program." This included chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, Piro says.

Interview with FBI agent who interrogated Saddam Archive - AnandTech Forums