Posted on 02/19/2016 6:25:35 AM PST by xzins
aded on Jun 12, 2007
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, appearing on the June 10, 2007, edition of "Meet The Press," reiterated and expanded on his claim that he was misled by unknown forces in the intelligence community who failed to reveal vital information to him before his infamous February 5, 2003, speech before the
Btw, We all heard it. FReepers knew better.
Yep, and I even wonder if that would be possible with a Muslim nation, due to Islam and Western philosophy being completely incompatible.
Where did ISIS get the mustard gas shells?
---------------
Syria had it's WMD stock pile. Don't you keep up with the news? Honest to God......
Here we go again, over and over and over and over and over and over and over. Thank you Donald for boosting the Democrats and elevating their crap. If he wanted to focus on lies, there are seven years worth of them sitting in the Oval Office.
Listen to Colin Powell on Meet the Press.
NO stockpiles of war materiel WMDs were never found.
IF you like, I think I can find George Bush himself saying that.
Answer the question, where did ISIS get those shells?
http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/02/17/yeah-iraq-had-wmds-cia-bought-them-from-secret-dealer-n1958246
Bush goes on TV and admits Iraq had no WMD at the time of invasion but somehow you hear that from Bush - someone who should know - and think the opposite. Really?
Absolutely agree. I never thought we'd be fighting Code Pinkos on FR because one of them was running for President.
So you were not shocked at all when Trump said that the Bush administration lied about WMDs. I wasn’t. I’d heard it before.
The rest of the internet world and the tv network world acted like Trump had finally said something so unsupportable that he’d be out on his ear in a matter of seconds.
It didn’t work that way.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357492/frightening-truth-about-syrias-wmds-stanley-kurtz
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/234626/saddams-wmds-lefts-iraq-lies-exposed-arnold-ahlert
http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/02/17/yeah-iraq-had-wmds-cia-bought-them-from-secret-dealer-n1958246
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/02/17/80505318/
Utter defeat and unconditional surrender would have required doing EVERYTHING that the Congressional resolution of Sep 19(?) 2001 allowed.
Defeat anyone/everyone who aided/abetted/comforted the responsible parties of 9/11.
Saudi Arabia would have been attacked, and Islam would have had to have been utterly defeated.
Powell is justifying why he made a mistake. He’s blaming his mistake on the intelligence community.
He says the intelligence was misleading and somebody withheld intelligence (qualifiers as to sources). Rumsfeld over at Defense had suspicions and shared them with the Chiefs. Powell had his own independent sources of intelligence and set of advisors. Ditto P.M. Tony Blair. I’m sorry, all of them as well as the President erred. In a sense, they were misled. But, they had bear the ultimate responsibility. They should have been more skeptical.
At the time of this interview, the Democrats were in charge of both houses of Congress. This was their opportunity to determine if and what was the breakdown in the intelligence community that would have exonerated Powell (or kept him in the same boat with Bush and others, in terms of not being sufficiently skeptical).
Two years later, there was a new President. If the Democrats in Congress couldn’t get to the bottom of it, maybe the new President could. Instead, we got one after another failure of intelligence: (1) the collapse of Iraq, (2) the rise of ISIS, (3) the debacle in Libya, (4) the debacle in Yemen, and (5) the spread of terrorism into Africa and Indonesia, and forays into the west.
I’m sorry, but every war has a dynamic of its own. Fundamentally, this is because the each side is itself adapting to what the other side is doing. If you have overwhelming force, you can overcome this, and achieve victory quickly with few casualties and little collateral damage. But, when you don’t have, or have but refuse to use overwhelming force, the other side can and will surprise you.
In terms of the doctrine of “preemptive defense,” based on intelligence, the war in Iraq was disquieting. The reason conclusion should be that we need levels of defense so as to be able to take a hit. Striking before getting hit, is fraught with danger.
Trump did not lie about the Bush administration lying about WMDs.
He heard it on Meet the Press from the mouth of Bush’s own Secretary of State.
ISIS took over weapon depots in Iraq.
Or didn’t you get that?
Post 44, I already answered my own question.
You just weren’t paying attention.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/14/isis-chemical-weapons-_n_5987106.html
http://www.ibtimes.com/saddam-era-chemical-weapons-now-under-isis-control-reports-1705144
http://m.nydailynews.com/news/world/isis-seizes-chemical-weapons-depot-baghdad-sarin-gas-rockets-article-1.1859934
And all of that means that Powell did not say what this video has him saying.
Listen to the video. He said what he said.
No, it means Colin Powell is a lying turd.
http://www.salon.com/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/
On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.
Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.
On April 23, 2006, CBS’s “60 Minutes†interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam’s foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. “We continued to validate him the whole way through,†said Drumheller. “The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy.â€
Saddam era WMDs captured in Iraq by ISIS
The British newspaper, The Telegraph reported this stunning little nugget yesterday, on June 19th:
Wait.....WHAT?
I thought there were no WMD's in Iraq, of any kind? Whatsoever!
Colin is covering his tracks. He got regular briefings and knew the intelligence was thin and unreliable. Bush and Blair both intended to depose Sadam with or without WMD’s. They just did not have the guts to say it was necessary. Blair almost said it in one speech tp Parliament.
If they had said it they would look a lot better now.
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.