Posted on 03/08/2016 12:32:52 PM PST by SeekAndFind
There was a real concern that Saddam was trying to develop nuclear weapons. Whether he would have succeeded will never be known, but the danger may have factored into the decision to remove him. That may be why Joe Wilson made his flimsy assertions (based on conversations with officials in Niger who may have had an interest in lying to him), to make it appear there was no danger than Saddam would get nukes.
“In any event, the sight of miles of Russian trucks heading south into Bekaa valley is etched into our minds, and we are not stupid.”
It didn’t seem to be a big deal to Bush, no matter what was in those trucks. He never made a big deal about it, which is completely ridiculous if the reason to invade supposedly included possible WMDs.
Freegards
Yes it was, but you obviously knew who I was talking about.........That's a good thing.
So you retire to your spread outside of town and play with your grandkids and read your detective novels. Two years later, the town is burned to the ground. Many dead, lives ruined, wealth lost.
You didn't cause it, but you damn sure helped bring it about.
He needed to follow up the Iraq war by destabilizing the Iran regime, and helping with its overthrow. It was ripe for that, so long as Americans didn’t invade. Instead, Bush focused on Iraq, and didn’t retaliate when Iran killed American soldiers on a daily basis. Ridiculous. If that was the plan, he should have just killed Saddam, replaced him with a Baath stooge of our own, and left town to leave the Iraqis and Iranians to kill each other.
And he didn’t bother warning America about the impending Leftist disaster Obama who would rapidly reverse any gains we made. He let the left hang Katrina’s dead around his neck. Man, screw politics.
He lied. Read his speech to the UN General Assembly.
In my view, the two most damning things about Bush are:
1. His failure to defend himself during his administration.
2. His failure to EVER say a word about the most damaging President in the history of the United States: Barack Obama.
#1 made him into a failed President.
#2 made him into a failed ex-President.
He is not stupid. But even stupidity would not be enough to explain either of these.
He sincerely believed what he said, but he exaggerated the evidence for his view.
Something similar is common in politics. Politicians believe in the "greater truth" which they must defend at all costs, even if means saying things that they don't have real evidence for.
It's not just politicians, either. Their supporters and opponents can be the same way.
Why even bother to kill Saddam? Should have had the Saudis pay him $100 Billion to attack Iran (again).
RE: He lied. Read his speech to the UN General Assembly.
This is the text of GWB’s speech to the UN General Assembly:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/sep/12/iraq.usa3
Can you tell me where in his speech he lied?
Which part was a lie?
Old wmd from the Iran/Iraq war[that later the Bush admin didn't take responsibility in medically helping our boys] was not reason enough to 'invade' Iraq, nor was the destability of the region weighed against Iraq even having new weapons.
No matter how bad SH was, he still was more of a stabilizing force than we ever could have become, and a natural bulwark against Iran.
Nor was the costs of the invasion ever properly explained or reasoned. We will be paying for those miscalculations for generations.
Not only that but there has been no public review of the policies and practices of the intelligence failure in supporting such a intervention, nor has anyone been held accountable for such actions. As with the typical government actions.
That was an option. I always thought Saddam had a hand in 9-11 in some fashion. There was that training ground where an old jet was, and some indications that Saddam knew 9-11 was coming. Also, it was clear that Saddam was going to work on getting America back at some point, it was only a matter of time. Probably better to eliminate him, but perhaps not, with hindsight.
Since Saddam and Al Qaeda were not natural allies, but had common enemies, I assume that Saddam used his intel networks to give some sort of operational support to AQ, perhaps without knowing they were up to something so big. I can see Saddam wanting to use AQ just enough to hurt and distract the US, short of triggering a massive response.
Bump.....
SH invaded two neighboring countries, fired SCUD missiles at Israel, harbored international terrorists, practiced genocide against the Kurds, slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people, plotted to assassinate a US president.
He received is just reward IMHO. GWB won the war against this mini-Hitler in the Middle East and BHO surrendered Iraq. I am at least grateful SH received his just reward in the end and that he was captured, brought to trial, and had to be held into account for his massive war crimes, genocide, violations of international law, support of terrorism, and ethnic cleansing.
And kept the animals in check. I'd rather have a SH than the flames of muslim jihad burning down the ME right now.
The largest chemical weapons manufacturing facility in the world was located inside Iraq just outside Baghdad when we marched into the city.
Duelfer Report on Chemical Weapons in Iraq
Praying that Trump or some significant emotional event shatters the MSM's hypnotism over the sheeple.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.