The war in Iraq

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

That's not a problem. We can start with his Medal of Freedom recipients.

The hearings will give us what we need to indict the Cheney Administration. We aren't talking the Oliver North syndrome here. The truth that the Administration was looking for very selective intelligence to justify their intentions is extremely close to the surface anyway. A person would have had to be in a coma not to notice that back in 2002 and 2003. My gosh, the entire Libby affair and indictment is based on that fact.

We can start anywhere, but nothing is going to happen as long as he has a majority in the house protecting him. It's no longer their intense blind love as it used to be during the Nazism fear period after 9/11. Now it's protecting their party from the largest scandal in American history. It's not going to be pleasant, but it must happen. Just as the republican party felt the dress stain hearings must occur, we feel the blood stain hearings must occur.

The two parties obviously have different priorities. (Lying about oral sex or killing thousands of soldiers, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens, and throwing hundreds of Billions of dollars out the window for personal war profiteering.)

We just feel our priority is at least as noble as yours was with Clinton, even though it doesn't involve thumping on a bible.

Cite me a single reference in the hearing conclusions that say that anyone in the White House falsified, manipulated or lied about the intelligence.

Of course all of the Democrats that I quoted earlier in this thread were just "citing erroneous intelligence" and not lying???? Is that the position?? Go back up an reread what all of those Democrats said about the SAME intelligence that Bush/Cheney had. Get real fellas.

There is not a single thing that supports your position. Remember Libby was indicted for the Plame outing affair---not manipulating intelligence.

I think you need to go back and read the panel Conclusions again.

Lee

[lhopp77]

Sunday, 25 February, 2001, 12:40 GMT
Iraq 'could build N-bomb'
German Intelligence Service

Iraq could produce nuclear weapons within three years, according to a German intelligence assessment.
The report also says the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) has evidence that Baghdad is working to develop its short-range rockets.

The BND also believes Iraq still possesses the capacity to resume the production of biological weapons at short notice.

Details of the information contained in the report was published in various German newspapers following a briefing to journalists by BND officials.

"It is clear that we have suspicions about Iraq," a BND official told Reuters news agency.

Ceasefire agreement.

The intellegence agency believes that Iraq has resumed efforts to build chemical and biological weapons since UN inspectors left the country in 1998.

But it says that Baghdad currently possesses only 10-20% of the conventional weapons it had during the Gulf War.

Under the ceasefire agreement which ended the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq was obliged to end its chemical and biological weapons capacity.

The United Nations team appointed to monitor Baghdad's compliance with the agreement left Iraq in 1998 after the government ceased co-operation with the weapons inspectors.

The BND says it has evidence to suggest the following:

Iraq has resumed its nuclear programme and may be capable of producing an atomic bomb in three years. Work has been observed at the Al Qaim site, believed to be the centre of Baghdad's nuclear programme.
Iraq is currently developing its Al Samoud and Ababil 100/Al Fatah short-range rockets, which can deliver a 300kg payload 150km (95 miles). Medium-range rockets capable of carrying a warhead 3,000km (1,900 miles) could be built by 2005 - far enough to reach Europe.
Iraq is also believed to be capable of manufacturing solid rocket fuel.
A Delhi-based company, blacklisted by the German Government because of its alleged role in weapons proliferation, has acted as a buyer on Iraq's behalf. Deliveries have been made via Malaysia and Dubai.
Since the UN inspectors left, the number of Iraqi sites involved in chemicals production has increased from 20 to 80. Of that total, the BND believes a quarter to be involved in making weapons.
Widespread procurement activity has been observed abroad and production of biological weapons could be resumed at short notice. It is possible that production may already have begun."

Shot down again, Robert. I just thought it was worth posting this again.

Lee

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Cite me a single reference in the hearing conclusions that say that anyone in the White House falsified, manipulated or lied about the intelligence.

Of course all of the Democrats that I quoted earlier in this thread were just "citing erroneous intelligence" and not lying???? Is that the position?? Go back up an reread what all of those Democrats said about the SAME intelligence that Bush/Cheney had. Get real fellas.

There is not a single thing that supports your position. Remember Libby was indicted for the Plame outing affair---not manipulating intelligence.

I think you need to go back and read the panel Conclusions again.

Lee

You took the sentences in the speeches out of context, remember? Well... you didn't. Just the site supporting the lie that you refuse to divulge. I guess you refuse to divulge your source due to national security, right?

The panel's conclusion on how the intelligence was handled is sealed due to ... oh yeah! once again for "national security" reasons. That has been an often used and convenient method of hiding the truth since Bush allowed the terrorist attack. Very convenient.

And also remember the reason the administration outed Plame is due to her husband saying the administration is lying about the yellow cake. Which... They were. Which...... will be part of the evidence used when they are eventually indicted. Which.... they will be.

[WGJ]

NUCLEAR CONCLUSIONS

(U) Conclusion 27. After reviewing all of the intelligence provided by the Intelligence Community and additional information requested by the Committee, the Committee believes that the judgment in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program, was not supported by the intelligence. The Committee agrees with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) alternative view that the available intelligence "does not add up to a compelling case for reconstitution."
(U) Conclusion 28. The assessments in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) regarding the timing of when Iraq had begun reconstituting its nuclear program are unclear and confusing.
(U) Conclusion 29. Numerous intelligence reports provided to the Committee showed that Iraq was trying to procure high strength aluminum tubes. The Committee believes that the information available to the Intelligence Community indicated that these tubes were intended to be used for an Iraqi conventional rocket program and not a nuclear program. (U) Conclusion 30. The Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) intelligence assessment on July 2, 2001 that the dimensions of the aluminum tubes "match those of a publicly available gas centrifuge design from the 1950s, known as the Zippe centrifuge" is incorrect. Similar information was repeated by the CIA in its assessments, including its input to the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), and by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) over the next year and a half.
(U) Conclusion 31. The Intelligence Community's position in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that the composition and dimensions of the aluminum tubes exceeded the requirements for non nuclear applications, is incorrect.
(**) Conclusion 32. The DELETED intelligence report on Saddam Hussein's personal interest in the aluminum tubes, if credible, did suggest that the tube procurement was a high priority, but it did not necessarily suggest that the high priority was Iraq's nuclear program.
(U) Conclusion 33. The suggestion in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Iraq was paying excessively high costs for the aluminum tubes is incorrect. In addition, 7075 T6 aluminum is not considerably more expensive than other more readily available materials for rockets as alleged in the NIE.
(U) Conclusion 34. The National Ground Intelligence Center's (NGIC) analysis that the material composition of the tubes was unusual for rocket motor cases was incorrect, contradicted information the NGIC later provided to the Committee, and represented a serious lapse for the agency with primary responsibility for conventional ground forces intelligence analysis.
(**) Conclusion 35. Information obtained by the Committee shows that the tubes were DELETED to be manufactured to tolerances tighter than typically requested for rocket systems. The request for tight tolerances had several equally likely explanations other than that the tubes were intended for a centrifuge program, however.
(U) Conclusion 36. Iraq's attempts to procure the tubes through intermediary countries did appear intended to conceal Iraq as the ultimate end user of the tubes, as suggested in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). Because Iraq was prohibited from importing any military items, it would have had to conceal itself as the end user whether the tubes were intended for a nuclear program or a conventional weapons program, however.
(**) Conclusion 37. Iraq's persistence in seeking numerous foreign sources for the aluminum tubes was not "inconsistent" with procurement practices as alle ed in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). Furthermore, such persistence ******************** SENTENCE DELETED ******************** was more indicative of produrement for a conventional weapons program than a covert nuclear program.
(U) Conclusion 38. The Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) initial reporting on its aluminum tube spin tests was, at a minimum, misleading and, in some cases, incorrect. The fact that these tests were not coordinated with other Intelligence Community agencies is an example of continuing problems with information sharing within the Intelligence Community.
(U) Conclusion 39. Iraq's performance of hydrostatic pressure tests on the tubes was more indicative of their likely use for a rocket program than a centrifuge program.
(**) Conclusion 40. Intelligence reports which showed ******************** SENTENCE DELETED ******************** were portrayed in the National Intelligence Estimate as more definitive than the reporting showed.
(**)Conclusion 41. ******************** SENTENCE DELETED ******************** in that it was only presented with analysis that supported the CIA's conclusions. The team did not discuss the issues with Department of Energy officials and performed its work in only one day.
(U) Conclusion 42. The Director of Central Intelligence was not aware of the views of all intelligence agencies on the aluminum tubes prior to September 2002 and, as a result, could only have passed the Central Intelligence Agency's view along to the President until that time.
(U) Conclusion 43. Intelligence provided to the Committee did show that Iraq was trying to procure magnets, high speed balancing machines and machine tools, but this intelligence did not suggest that the materials were intended to be used in a nuclear program.
(U) Conclusion 44. The statement in the National Intelligence Estimate that "a large number of personnel for the new [magnet] production facility, worked in Iraq's pre Gulf War centrifuge program," was incorrect.
(U) Conclusion 45. The statement in the National Intelligence Estimate that the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission was "expanding the infrastructure research laboratories, production facilities, and procurement networks - to produce nuclear weapons," is not supported by the intelligence provided to the Committee.
(U) Conclusion 46. The intelligence provided to the Committee which showed that Iraq had kept its cadre of nuclear weapons personnel trained and in positions that could keep their skills intact for eventual use in a reconstituted nuclear program was compelling, but this intelligence did not show that there was a recent increase in activity that would have been indicative of recent or impending reconstitution of Iraq's nuclear program as was suggested in the National Intelligence Estimate.
(U) Conclusion 47. Intelligence information provided to the Committee did show that Saddam Hussein met with Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission personnel and that some security improvements were taking place, but none of the reporting indicated the IAEC was engaged in nuclear weapons related work.

[Electrophil]

Bill, I think we are wasting our time. Lee can read about it in all those "far left liberal news organizations" once the hearings start next year. Fox will have abandoned Bush by then trying to keep their ratings from tanking.

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

I guess you refuse to divulge your source due to national security, right?

How about BBC as a source for reporting the German Intelligence on the Iraqi Nuclear threat? Hardly a Pro-Bush supporter!!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/1189182.stm

Lee

[lhopp77]

Again hardly a conservative, Bush supporting source of information.

Get real Robert!!!!

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EB05Ak02.html

Lee

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

How about BBC as a source for reporting the German Intelligence on the Iraqi Nuclear threat? Hardly a Pro-Bush supporter!!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/1189182.stm

Lee

No, they support Bush's puppet, the PM there.

The article is dated 2001, before the UN inspectors went back in and confirmed he didn't have the capability. I think their report was: There is no evidence he is reconstituting a nuclear weapons program.

Back again to the premise that you can't prove something is "not" there.

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Again hardly a conservative, Bush supporting source of information.

Get real Robert!!!!

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EB05Ak02.html

Lee

Who is disputing other countries picked up the contracts once Rumsfield quit selling to that "evil dictator" ?

[lhopp77]

Just read a few of these.

http://www.danegerus.com/weblog/Comm...vComment=12909

Lee

[lhopp77]

This is what 77 Senators voted for:

Why did we go to war in Iraq? The vast majority of members of Congress who voted for the Joint Congressional Resolution authorizing war against Iraq (296-133 in the House; 77-23 in the Senate), said it very well when they committed themselves to the following mission:

Relevant Excerpts:


October 11, 2002

Joint Resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 (1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949 (1994);

Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President `to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677;

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable';

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to—

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that—

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Just read a few of these.

http://www.danegerus.com/weblog/Comm...vComment=12909

Lee

I just did. He hasn't updated his site in a while.

He must be in survival camp right now trying to light a fire with 2 sticks and a pile of leaves. I guess he's assuming that when "da big one" comes, it will knock out all the bic lighters with that electromagnetic pulse.

[lhopp77]

Robert, how do you like the wording of the Joint Resolution that all of your "favorite" politicians voted for? It seems that they gave the President some additional powers relative to the war on Terror---I think those powers will come up again---don't you?? Maybe they already have?

Lee

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Robert, how do you like the wording of the Joint Resolution that all of your "favorite" politicians voted for? It seems that they gave the President some additional powers relative to the war on Terror---I think those powers will come up again---don't you?? Maybe they already have?

Lee

That was my entire problem right after 9/11, and before the administration's complete rape of the US budget. Fear and a bible thumping war mongering republican congress. I repeat myself on the following:

[demonsvx]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

That was my entire problem right after 9/11, and before the administration's complete rape of the US budget. Fear and a bible thumping war mongering republican congress. I repeat myself on the following:

I yet once again ask the question why didnt we get Osama Bin Laden FIRST!? Iraq could have been taken care of back in '91 when Bush Sr. had the chance. Oh wait stupidity repeats itself especially in family bloodlines Wake up people do you really believe we can win this war if we stay in the Middle East? These people want us out.