[Azure]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Well Azure, I have read the Senate intelligence report on WMDs in Iraq, and yes, Curveball and the Yellowcake Uranium were intelligence failures - BUT - the thing you have to remember is that these were gross miscalcuations, bordering on criminal negligence. The Yellowcake documents in Niger were considered to be "obvious fakes" according to just about any independant source who reviewed them, including Hans Blix, prior to the outbreak of war in Iraq. Curveball was considered to be a very sketchy subject, based on the foriegn intelligence service (was it the Germans?) who captured him. Who even warned the Americans to stay as far away from him as possible, and not believe a word he says.

Somehow I doubt that all the intelligence the US used to justify invading Iraq has been released to the public.

But you are right, both of them situations turned out to be a pretty big failure. Yet, like I said before, when your intelligence czar comes to you with this evidence and tells you its a 'slam dunk' case...what would you do?

Now, with Intelligence, there is some stuff that is conjecture, I can provide you sources if you like - you wont find much talk about curveball in the Senate report - but you will find what I mentioned about Yellowcake in there.

I'm sure I've read just about everything about Curveall and Niger. And I doubt we disagree on anything. All I'm saying is that its easy for me and you to look back and talk about the failures, how some of the evidence 'might' have been manipulated, but its not that easy for Bush to do.

The question you have to ask yourself is why the CIA was pushing this intelligence - this is arguably the best intelligence agency in the world - when there was so much doubt about it in the world community?

You tell me. Not only was the CIA pushing it, but arguably every single other intelligence agency in the US agreed with them.

My personal opinion is that Bush Jr wanted a rationale to invade Iraq, so they found a bunch of sketchy intel to support it. I also think that Bush and most of congress believed Saddam probably had WMDs - but nothing concrete to prove it.

Of course.

And my personal opinion is that like the rest of Congress, including ALL of the Democrats(Obama too)....Bush believed Saddam had WMD, and therefore he posed a threat to the US.

I just find it strange that the complete US government, Democrats and Republicans alike were 'manipulated'...strangely enough, by this evidence that Bush supposedly 'lied' about.

Even stranger is the fact that before Bush even came into office, the US government was already saying that Saddam possessed WMD.

And just curious, how exactly do you manage a blackops that plants the means of production of Nukes? This isn't like building a pipe bomb here, there has to be some seriously extensive equipment, not to mention, once you start getting a lot of people involved, the web of secrecy diminishes greatly.

It doesn't even have to be anything nuclear.

Nobody would have cried foul play had the US simply found chemical or biological agents in Iraq.

And I doubt the US, with all their resources would have had any problem planting that evidence, had Bush really 'lied.'

I mean, if I was going to war knowing that most of my intelligence was cooked, the least I would have done is cover my bases.