Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dayuhan who wrote (99638)	5/31/2003 12:21:57 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) of 281500

I don't think the people referred to in the article below can be dismissed as a bunch of liberal fruitcakes. It really does look like the administration decided what they wanted to do, and revised the intel to suit that goal, instead of basing a decision on the available intelligence Let's not jump to conclusions. There are a lot of sound reasons to believe a) that Saddam had WMDs (he gave up $200 billion in oil revenues, remember?) and b) for the Bush administration not to want to rely on an argument that would come back to bite them. After all, it was hardly as if WMDs was the ONLY reason to go into Iraq, it was just the lowest common denominator reason. The next question in the public arena, Steven, will be, did the Bush administration falsify the intel on Iraq OR, was the intelligence on Iraqi WMDs just crummy? even more worrying, if true. Now, how do we sort out sincere complaints about intel misuse from the anticipatory butt-covering from the intelligence orgs? Seems to me that the complaints in this article fit equally well in either category.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next