National Intelligence Estimate: Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003

[Dilloduck]

I, for one, am perfectly OK with Dubya being the poster child for GOP ineptitude and corruption right up until the next election. I don't want him going anywhere. And just like Dubya did in 2000 when he ran against Clinton and not Gore by talking about bringing decency back to the oval office, the democrats can - and to some extent certainly should - run against Bush instead of your candidate by talking about bringing honesty and intelligence back to the oval office. The people may have voted for him because he was the kind of guy that they would like to have a beer with, but they now clearly realize that he really is numb as a pounded thumb and in way over his head in terms of the intellectual challenges that face the CinC.

I see a real opportunity for third party then I cause I don't see an intellectual in either batch.

[retiredman]

one does not need to be a rocket scientist to be a MAJOR upgrade!

[Sir Evil]

Just like y'all keep blaimg Goat-Boy and the Peanut Farmer for our current straights...Right?

Not my style weezer, I really have'nt much to say either way about them, nor have I. Well maybe in reference to some liberal hogwash but not of true opinion.

The faulty intel came, not from any of the intelligence agencies, but from the office Paul Wolfowitz set up at the Pentagon. The carreer intelligence analysts knew the intel was shady, but the Bush administration didn't want to hear that. The only difference between the NIE on Iran and the one on Iraq before the war is that the real report went public before Bush, Cheney and the rest of the merry band could launch another illegal and unjustified war, this time against Iran.

The facts are there, and there's nothing to spin or fabricate. They lied. Get over it.

Yeah could be but again if factual there would probably be a whole lot more made about, and hell maybe even a little better source for you to quote. Fact is that the whole WMD intelligence was far from needed to invade Iraq, hang your hat on it as much as you would like but bottom line it was not needed.

Furthermore if Bush and cohorts were able to fool the world with Iraq, why not hop too it as soon as Iran was a problem, and head off the NIE report?

Well call it what you like Bully but the resolutions were not fulfilled by Iraq, and just because other countries turned a blind eye to the reality of it you feel that we should of as well, very admirable of you. Had those other countries had the kahunas to enforce the resolutions they passed would it even make a difference? Probably not being Bush said there were WMD's.

[Sir Evil]

I, for one, am perfectly OK with Dubya being the poster child for GOP ineptitude and corruption right up until the next election.

And you should be, I mean we all know that the dems are a mere image of perfection. Yeah, have a nice cup of shut the fuck up while you are at it.

[retiredman]

Not my style weezer, I really have'nt much to say either way about them, nor have I. Well maybe in reference to some liberal hogwash but not of true opinion.


Yeah could be but again if factual there would probably be a whole lot more made about, and hell maybe even a little better source for you to quote. Fact is that the whole WMD intelligence was far from needed to invade Iraq, hang your hat on it as much as you would like but bottom line it was not needed.

Furthermore if Bush and cohorts were able to fool the world with Iraq, why not hop too it as soon as Iran was a problem, and head off the NIE report?

Well call it what you like Bully but the resolutions were not fulfilled by Iraq, and just because other countries turned a blind eye to the reality of it you feel that we should of as well, very admirable of you. Had those other countries had the kahunas to enforce the resolutions they passed would it even make a difference? Probably not being Bush said there were WMD's.

the rest of the sundry invasion rationales were meaningless if the American people had not been convinced that Saddam had a hand in 9/11 and had the weaponry to do us even further harm.

[Dilloduck]

one does not need to be a rocket scientist to be a MAJOR upgrade!

no worries there --LMAO I'll settle for someone with more common sense than a third grader.

[Sir Evil]

the rest of the sundry invasion rationales were meaningless if the American people had not been convinced that Saddam had a hand in 9/11 and had the weaponry to do us even further harm.

Meaningless? yeah I guess so, and is indeed why your UN is the irrelevant body it is today. You are exactly the kind that makes such statements, and exactly the kind that have'nt the backbone to enforce them. Tell me, what were the purposes of the resolutions then? Just kind of buying time in hopes of actualy diplomacy taking place while the rest of the crooked world were lining there pockets as well?

[retiredman]

Meaningless? yeah I guess so, and is indeed why your UN is the irrelevant body it is today. You are exactly the kind that makes such statements, and exactly the kind that have'nt the backbone to enforce them. Tell me, what were the purposes of the resolutions then? Just kind of buying time in hopes of actualy diplomacy taking place while the rest of the crooked world were lining there pockets as well?

they were meaningless in terms of garnering the public support necessary for such an unprompted unilateral commencement of a war. Without WMD's and without the believed 9/11 connection, America would not have allowed Bush to start the war in Iraq, IMHO.

And if violating UN sanctions were grounds for America starting wars, we should have gone to war against Israel decades ago

[Dilloduck]

they were meaningless in terms of garnering the public support necessary for such an unprompted unilateral commencement of a war. Without WMD's and without the believed 9/11 connection, America would not have allowed Bush to start the war in Iraq, IMHO.

America DIDN'T "allow" any war to start. It was a collaboration by the executive and legislative branches of our government.

[Sir Evil]

they were meaningless in terms of garnering the public support necessary for such an unprompted unilateral commencement of a war. Without WMD's and without the believed 9/11 connection, America would not have allowed Bush to start the war in Iraq, IMHO.

And if violating UN sanctions were grounds for America starting wars, we should have gone to war against Israel decades ago

That a pile of dookie! Again had the other leaders fulfilled their parts in the resolutions they passed there would of been no reason for unilateral action.

So first we were wrong with unilateral action but then you say America would not of allowed it, who's calling the shots in your world? Are we calling the shots ourselves or are we seeking world support first?

Get over it, no matter how much you cry about it the war happened, as much as your self righteous opinions say otherwise not a damn thing is going to change at the moment. WMD's may of been the last call to rid the world of Bush but keep crying that river as it didn't, and wont work.

[retiredman]

America DIDN'T "allow" any war to start. It was a collaboration by the executive and legislative branches of our government.

do you honestly think, that if Americans had been vehemently opposed to Bush's plan to go to war against Iraq, that right before the congressional elections, congress would have voted to authorize his use of force to do so?

really?

[retiredman]

That a pile of dookie! Again had the other leaders fulfilled their parts in the resolutions they passed there would of been no reason for unilateral action.

So first we were wrong with unilateral action but then you say America would not of allowed it, who's calling the shots in your world? Are we calling the shots ourselves or are we seeking world support first?

Get over it, no matter how much you cry about it the war happened, as much as your self righteous opinions say otherwise not a damn thing is going to change at the moment. WMD's may of been the last call to rid the world of Bush but keep crying that river as it didn't, and wont work.

I said nothing about world support. I am merely pointing out that, without Americans believing that Saddam had a role in 9/11 and weaponry capable of doing us even further harm, America would not have supported the president's plan to invade, conquer and occupy Iraq.

[Dilloduck]

do you honestly think, that if Americans had been vehemently opposed to Bush's plan to go to war against Iraq, that right before the congressional elections, congress would have voted to authorize his use of force to do so?

really?

It's irrelevant--they weren't vehemently opposed to it.

[trobinett]

I said nothing about world support. I am merely pointing out that, without Americans believing that Saddam had a role in 9/11 and weaponry capable of doing us even further harm, America would not have supported the president's plan to invade, conquer and occupy Iraq.

Yea, yea, I know, that's your story, and your sticking to it, how fucking wonderful............

[Dilloduck]

I said nothing about world support. I am merely pointing out that, without Americans believing that Saddam had a role in 9/11 and weaponry capable of doing us even further harm, America would not have supported the president's plan to invade, conquer and occupy Iraq.

pure conjecture and it's too late anyway. Get over it.