Lost and found in Iraq (Baghdad museum antiquities)

The Washington Times ^ | June 11, 2003 | Helle Dale

[FairOpinion]

Will the Bush administration ever win the global public relations battle over the war in Iraq? Short of finding an Iraqi laboratory in a cave deep underground

[FairOpinion]

The accusers keep running around accusing, when they are PROVEN liars, and their lies are exposed, they just ignore it and jump onto the next topic to continue their baseless accusations, hoping that people will beleive that accusations = facts.

The looting story was NOT a mistake, it was a deliberate lie, because anyone with 15 minutes could have, and the journalists should have, done research and found that there were procedures in place to mmove antiquities into vaults before the war. Also many museum workers knew about it, since they did it, and also obviously the journalists didn't talk with any of them, they just ran with a lie.

[Paul Atreides]

Concerning the weapons sites, I heard somewhere that they have only been able to inspect about 1/3 of the sites that exist.

[JohnGalt]

"And if U.S. intelligence failed, congressional committees should indeed investigate."

We need to identify the dupers and remove them, even if it means Rummy and his Defense Policy Board have to resign. I agree with the author of this article.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Will the Bush administration ever win the global public relations battle over the war in Iraq? Short of finding an Iraqi laboratory in a cave deep underground — complete with scientists stirring vats of anthrax and the bubonic plague while humming "Hi, ho. Hi, ho. It's off to work we go" — it's hard to imagine. Critics of the war will likely continue to find ways of discrediting the war post facto. Some things never change.

Love that opening!

Bush Doctrine Unfolds :

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Bush Doctrine Unfold , click below:
	click here >>>	Bush Doctrine Unfold	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[FairOpinion]

"And if U.S. intelligence failed, congressional committees should indeed investigate."

We need to identify the dupers and remove them, even if it means Rummy and his Defense Policy Board have to resign. I agree with the author of this article.

---

You are taking things out of context. Your statement, after quoting the one sentence from the article ignores the IF, in that sentence. You apparently are taking it as fact that the intelligence was manipulated: "we need to identify the dupers and remove them" -- how do you know there were any? The information dates back to Clinton, so do you think he manipulated the intelligence information aboutIraq?

[JohnGalt]

Since information has to pass through many levels, there are clearly several people who screwed up and several people made incorrect decisions. Investigations will have to determine who these people are as it has been proven time and time again these agencies cannot police themselves.

Do you disagree?

[FairOpinion]

How do you know anyone "screwed up"?

Saddam had 4 years since 1998 to perfect his art of deception and hiding of WMD and more recently he knew 6 onths in advance that we were coming in, so he had plenty of time to hide his WMD and/or move them to an other country, like Syria.

Just because we haven't found them, it doesn't mean they don't exist. We haven't found Saddam either, does that mean he never existed?

Also it is not really true that we haven't found them, just that Democrats keep ignoring it: they found mustard gas and cyanide in the Euphrates, they found theses two mobile biolabs, and the UN inspectors back when they were there found anthrax, botulism, and so o, and Saddam admitted tohaving thousands of liters of anthrax, etc.

So there is absolutely NO doubt that Saddam had them. For Democrats to claim that the WMD was a "phony excuse" is a big LIE. Period.

So what's to investigate?

[JohnGalt]

Why don't you ask the author?

Or do you disagree with this article?

[FairOpinion]

I agree with the article.

I believe you missed his point by trying to latch onto that one sentence out of context.

[FairOpinion]

You seem to have missed this:

But it must be stressed that U.S. estimates of Saddam's chemical and biological arsenals were widely shared by intelligence services the world over, in Britain, at the United Nations, even in France. To pretend otherwise is, as stated by National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice on Sunday, "revisionist history."

[JohnGalt]

But that is a stupid point: so what if the British/French/Somalian intelligence agency screwed up as well.

Are you suggesting we should tolerate a second rate, bungling intelligence aparatus?

[FairOpinion]

Sure, everyone in the world "screwed up" and they just imagined that Saddam had WMD, including all those Kurds who just dropped dead, because they imagined that Saddam was gassing them.

(/sarcasm)

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Good one!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Even better one!

[FairOpinion]

"Even better one!"

Thank you. :)

[JohnGalt]

Your hyperbole betrays your propaganda. Not everyone in the world 'screwed up' (the 'everybody does it defense') just incompetent government agencies, bureaucrats, and political sycophants.