http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/5328592.stm
The Intelligence Committee is a bipartisan body consisting of eight Republicans and seven Democrats, and is chaired by Republican senator Pat Roberts.
Quote:
There is no evidence of formal links between Iraqi ex-leader Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda leaders prior to the 2003 war, a US Senate report says.
[...]
It said that Iraq and al-Qaeda were ideologically poles apart.
"Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support," it said.
The Senate report added that the Iraqi regime had repeatedly rejected al-Qaeda requests for meetings.
|
Link to the full report:
http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf
The report also added that "Postwar findings indicate that almost all of the major assessments in the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq’s WMD programs were wrong."
So based on this bipartisan report, which states quite bluntly that the Hussein regime had no connection to al-Qaeda and further emphases the lack of WMD programs in Iraq, is it possible for anyone to continue to support the casus belli? At least with Afghanistan, there were established ties between the Taliban and AQ; the Iraq war, on the other hand, just seems like a colassal waste of life for no proper justification.
