Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (49697)	6/14/2005 8:08:58 AM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 173976

A memorandum written by Prime Minister Tony Blair's cabinet office in late July 2002 explicitly states that the Bush administration had made "no political decisions" to invade Iraq Note that "Captain Ed" did not include "to invade Iraq" within the quote marks. That's because the ELM doesn't say that. Ironically, the same people arguing that the Downing Street Memo (DSM) contains some sort of smoking gun against the Bush administration also claim that this memo [ELM] supports the same argument. I'm not sure that I would use the word "ironic", but when you read the ELM it certainly does support the same argument. It further documents that the Bush Administration was making no plans for the political aftermath of a regime change. Utter incompetence by the Bush Administration. And when you read what the Brits believe is necessary for a legal military action, it's pretty clear that the Iraq War didn't meet their standard for legality. Still no weapons of mass destruction.... jttmab

To: jlallen who wrote (49697)	6/14/2005 12:19:56 PM
From: Mao II	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 173976

Let's review what the memo actually states; then you can head for the trashcan yourself, preferably head first: "C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action." .... "The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections. The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force."