Because of the FAT,DISGUSTING, PIG, BASTARD ROVE!
Why?
Karl Rove.
The MSM at the time derided the finds a ‘old’ WMDs, as if they were no longer effective..........
But why did his administration sit on the evidence of Saddam Husseins WMDs?
ROVE!!!!
Just playing Devil’s Advocate: Is there a possibility that releasing the information would compromise other intel operations?
“The Brain”
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/10/report_rove_kept_discovery_of_iraqs_wmd_secret.html
I'm not sure Bush "sat on" evidence of WMDs. I recall hearing about stockpiles being found, but the imbecile "Talking Heads" kept on as if they had not, and the story quickly died. Bush didn't play it up and say "I told you so".
Where are the ones they found and why didn’t we destroy them???
This is inexplicable. The nation has gone from prospering to a euro-socialist hellhole PRECISELY because of this decision. How is God’s name did the Bush administration sit on this information offering justification for their war decisions, and at the same time send more troops into Iraq with public opinion firmly against the war. This is the biggest news bombshell in my memory, as this decision literally paved the way for the rise of the far left, the election of a Democrat super majority and the election of Obama...and every aspect of massive government power grab since.
On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddams weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."
Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clintons chances of dodging impeachment.
The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.
Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure, he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.
“Turd Blossom” stopped it. Turd Blossom is code name for Rove!
Because the only ones who would have been impressed with that are/were GOP Busshies.
In 2002 and 2003 Bush Cheney, Rummy, Condi were making the case that the Iraq invasion was about nukes not WWI era poison gas technology.
‘”We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, on Iraq's nuclear capabilities and the Bush administration's case for war, Sept. 8, 2002’
As Obama said, 'If you like your doctor...', now mDems claim the Obamacare insured # is all that counts not your lost doctor.
Since it is highly unlikely that Bush's team was filled with thick skulls, and since there is no way to logically characterize Bush's refusal to defend himself as "gentlemanly behavior", we are led to the uncomfortable conclusion that - like his successor Obama - Bush was never really in charge of anything, and his role in office was to fulfill the orders of another entity.
The American public is a long way, however, from being able to accept that "their" President isn't really in charge. In the fullness of time, perhaps we serfs will be allowed to learn more.
Several years back, a buddy of mine who was over in the sandbox told me that he didn’t get it. He had seen the WMD’s and it was common knowledge that yes, Hussein had them. I figured it was true, but there were reasons for keeping it on the hush hush, need to know basis. I LOVE the fact that the left has been slobbering all over themselves for so many years now about how Bush lied. HA!! Idiots.
The Bush administration DIDN’T sit on this information.
It was reported, and MANY Freepers are well aware of the WMDs, precursors and tons of yellowcake.
The MSM had this information, announced it once or not at all, and then let it die away without discussion. Any attempt by the Bush administration to discuss it was quickly buried.
If they did announce these finds, the MSM didn’t give it any air: WMDs were dismissed as being “old”, precursors as being “insecticide” and tons of yellowcake as “unrefined” or “non-weapons grade”.
Because Saudis who own Bush (and the rest of his political team) told them what to say and do.
1) You did not build your business.
2) Push the lie of global warming.
3) That said you can keep your doctor under Obamacare.
4) That the Affordable Health Care Act was affordable.
5) That shipped guns to Mexico in order to blame the second Amendment.
6) That have that lied about Benghazi.
7) That sicked the IRS on conservative groups, etc....
Oh so now you are going to believe the on the record certified lying politicans this time on WMDs???
The Administration is so desperate to sell conservatives and the majority of people war with Syria... They are replaying the WMD card.
Do you really think American troops should risk their lives so that Saudi Arabia can build that gas pipeline that Assad refused to sell them?
The WMDs in Syria is filthy lie. The only people over there that got caught releasing any type of WMD was ISIS (aka Al-Qaeda/FSA/The Rebels) who got it from our friends...Saudi Arabia.
Oh yeah I know the war mongers in the media try to say it was Assad, but a UN investigation determined it was NOT Syria but the Rebels trying to get the U.S. to join the war.
But that was either ignored by the same media or a was on the very back pages of the newspaper.
Don't be so gullible and fall for the WMD bull$hit again.
Excellent article EXCEPT that this outraged author doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to propose possible answers to his own question beyond some flaccid notion of political campaigning.
“
Bush Didnt Lie: But why did his administration sit on the evidence of Saddam Husseins WMDs?”
Why?
1. They wanted to lose. There are serious reasons to support this answer. Primarily because the establishment hates the conservative movement.
2. They were instructed to do so by some behind the scenes, covert power player. It’s hard to comment on this, but the conspiracy notion is that a power elite pulls the world’s strings and this would have somehow played into their strategy.
3. Bush wanted to reveal this but could not despite the damage it was causing him politically because it would have enabled other countries or people groups to make irrefutable claims against Iraq’s resources. The Kurds and Kurdish independence comes to mind.
The ONLY news here is that the NYT is FINALLY reporting on Saddam’s WMD.
Of course Saddam always had WMD and never hesitated using it.
This Bush lied, people died crap is nothing more than Left wing propaganda BS.