Problems With Intelligence Information

Log Out | Lost Password? | Topics | Search Contact | Register | My Profile | SO home | MOL home

Thread Originator Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post   Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author Message   Jurgnz Citizen Username: Jurgnz Post Number: 11 Registered: 1-2004 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 11:24 am:        At this point we all realize that there were some serious problems with the intelligence information being supplied to President Bush prior to the liberation of Iraq. Based upon that intelligence information; Bush thought that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons that could be pressed into service in short order. Not only did George Bush believe this intelligence information, but so did quite a few other people. Do you need some reminders? OK, here goes. On October 9, 1998 some members of the U.S. Senate sent a letter to Bill Clinton expressing their concerns about Saddam and his weapons program. That letter contained this paragraph: "We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction program." That letter was signed by Tom Daschle, Carl Levin and none other than John Kerry. These three Senators, one a probable Democratic nominee for president, are now slamming George Bush for acting on the very intelligence they relied on for their 1998 letter to their president, Bill Clinton. You cannot have it both ways! Carl Levin is particularly obnoxious. He has been pressing the idea that Bush should have known that the intelligence information he was relying on was faulty. In September of 2002 Levin said "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Levin, it seems, believed the exact same intelligence information that Bush relied on ... and now he's faulting Bush. Try this: A surgeon finds a lump in your breast. He wants to do a biopsy. A test of the lump shows it to be benign. Do you condemn the doctor because he didn't know that the growth was benign before he went in there with a scalpel? All of this 20-20 hindsight is wonderful, but when it comes to the defense of our country you can act on what you think might be true in 12 months, you act on what you believe to be true right now. Face up to the facts. A bloodthirsty dictator has been removed from power. Rape rooms are no longer in operation in Iraq. The torture chambers have been shut down. Mass graves containing hundreds of thousands have been uncovered. Saddam will never again use chemicals to kill tens of thousands of his enemies. I'd like to see Kerry stand up to this issue, rather than simply blaming Bush for taking the action he thought necessary. But the political climate calls for further polarizing. Wouldn't our Nation benefit from a Democratic candidate who tries to bring our Nation together?   Dave Citizen Username: Dave Post Number: 6311 Registered: 4-1998 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 11:36 am:        The problem wasn't mostly the intelligence. The problem was Bush & Co. picking out which intelligence they wanted to feature, ie. cherry picking out what they wanted us to believe while hiding the information that hedged or contradicted it. What they did was harm open public debate about an issue that has ended up costing billions of dollars and thousands of lives and that's just plain wrong regardless of which party does it.   Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 2008 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 11:50 am:        It might not be a big gain for the Democratic candidate to criticize Bush's record on the Iraq war. The next president is likely to make the same grave mistakes. I hope that the economy is the bigger issue in the election. Tom Reingold the prissy-pants There is nothing   JJC Citizen Username: Mercury Post Number: 201 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 11:55 am:        Tom - Do you mean cook the intelligence and give no-bid contracts to your politically connected friends?   Brett Citizen Username: Bmalibashksa Post Number: 652 Registered: 7-2003 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 11:56 am:        Why would they cherry pick the intelligence that they wanted us to see if they knew they weren’t going to be able to produce the proof? There is no way the American public could stop the war. Why not say “This guy is a tyrant, we’re going in”? I sure that they knew they would have to supply proof before the election, they probably felt they could do that. Plus you’re discounting all the other countries that thought he had the weapons also. Hey the intelligence was bad. If you want to blame the administration for having a piss poor intelligence agency that’s fine. But it would be a pretty dumb move to purposely lie and have to fess up before the election.   cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 843 Registered: 8-2003 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 11:57 am:        I'm all for this inquiry being done independently. I'd like to know why and how we undershot N. Korea and Pakistan and Libya, and as it stands now overshot Iraq. I don't know where Iran falls in there yet, but we seem to be on top of that one.   Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 2013 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 12:11 pm:        No, JJC, I don't expect the Democrat to give no-bid contracts to his cronies. I hope that becomes another election issue. Another issue is how Bush has killed the press conference. He will not speak without a script unless he's speaking to elementary school students. I guess he feels most at home with them. I think the president owes the people more open communication. Where is the public outcry? I'm really angry over this. Tom Reingold the prissy-pants There is nothing   tjohn Citizen Username: Tjohn Post Number: 2195 Registered: 12-2001 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 12:15 pm:        There is a good reason for not letting Bush do solo press conferences. He lacks the verbal skills and, more importantly, a command of the issues, so any press conference will have to be followed by hundreds of hours of damage control by his handlers.   drewdix Citizen Username: Drewdix Post Number: 467 Registered: 7-2001 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 12:22 pm:        He also gets testy and churlish very quickly. Sadly, keeping him away from the mike has long been an administration strategy. I think he's had fewer than 10 press conferences since 2000; recent predecessors numbered over 30 by this point in their terms.   Tom Reingold Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 2014 Registered: 1-2003 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 12:24 pm:        Good points, tjohn and drewdix, those are explanations but not excuses. If we the president doesn't have the verbal skills and knowledge of his own damned job to answer fair questions, he shouldn't be president. Tom Reingold the prissy-pants There is nothing   ligeti Citizen Username: Ligeti Post Number: 69 Registered: 7-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 12:28 pm:        Don't get your hopes up. His advisers realize that would be suicide. In situations requiring that he actually say something on his own, he gets that lost, terrified, doe in the headlights expression, and after a pause, blurts out something mundane like "...Freedom is a good thing!" I am frustrated, too, but since there's not really anything there in the first place aside from the prepared statement (maybe some pictures, too), there's not much we can do about it. The guy is just in way over his head.   JJC Citizen Username: Mercury Post Number: 202 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 1:13 pm:        Bush will be on Meet the Press this Sunday...   bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 4546 Registered: 5-2001 Posted on Thursday, February 5, 2004 - 2:19 pm:        I wonder how many people Rove has in the backroom down at GOP headquarters looking for dirt or inconsistencies on Kerry. My sense is that the attacks have picked up in the last day or so. My favorite, usually swept under the rug, Bush justification for the Iraq war was the drones that were going to attack east coast cities with dirty bombs after being launched from sea. How many bought that one? I note that even Colin Powell, a good solider, has been distancing himself from the Iraq intelligence mess.   Cowboy Citizen Username: Cowboy Post Number: 324 Registered: 9-2003 Posted on Friday, February 6, 2004 - 2:32 pm:        One reason the peaceniks advanced for not invading Iraq was that Saddam would unleash his WMD.   JJC Citizen Username: Mercury Post Number: 207 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Friday, February 6, 2004 - 5:56 pm:        Says it all.   thecleaner Citizen Username: Thecleaner Post Number: 3 Registered: 1-2004 Posted on Friday, February 6, 2004 - 6:16 pm:        Jurgnz aren't you an Essex County Democratic Committee Member? Perhaps I am wrong. Will you be at the John Kerry fundraiser in NJ?   Montagnard Citizen Username: Montagnard Post Number: 402 Registered: 6-2003 Posted on Friday, February 6, 2004 - 9:48 pm:        quote: One reason the peaceniks advanced for not invading Iraq was that Saddam would unleash his WMD. These would of course be the "peace through strength" peaceniks of the Heritage Foundation and other strategically-challenged Republican outfits. They're trying hard, so let's not be too harsh, okay?