Re: Only One Problem
Submitted by jr565 (United States), Apr 27, 2006 at 18:46
1. The CIA knew there were no WMD, informed the President, and the President dishonestly chose to cover this up in favor of using the WMD issue as a pretext for war.
2. The CIA knew there were no WMD, informed the President, and the President honestly rejected their knowledge as incorrect based on some other "more reliable" source.
3. The CIA was fooled by Saddam Hussein just like the rest of the
Worldt he one problem with your assessment mark is in fact 1, 2, and 3 are wrong.
according to this Sadaam the entire time was trying to continue his weapons programs but had a bunch of yes men kowtowing to his every whim and not delivering on their promises. His intentions were to continue weapons productions and his people were telling him they were doing so only they weren't delivering. If Sadaam himself thinks that he's continuing weapons production that explains his actions in not cooperating, which also explains why we thought he had weapons too.
Also, if we are to believe this article, then in fact at the last minute Sadaam did destroy his weapons. THere is much evidence that some was moved to syria, and Duelfler, suggested that even though there were no stockpiles the programs were still intact and would be restarted once sanctions were lifted.
But if that were true, then Bush did not lie about Weapons that were there until the eve of war, which sadaam at the last minute got rid of to try to stop the war. up until the eve of the war, there were weapons which sadaam at the last minute destroyed, which we took as more subterfuge on his part. "Remove all traces of weapons" we took as him moving the weapons, when according to this ,it meant destroying those weapons. But in either case, it means THAT THERE WERE WEAPONS. so the CIA didn't lie about such weapons being there, because the Iraqis wouldn't be talking about destroying all traces of something that doesn't exist if that were the case.
If there is lying going on, its from your side.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (58) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes