>>>>I know this, nuclear weapons were not the single basis of military action, or the most prominent justification provided in the State of the Union address. They were a question, a possibility, something confirmed in Iraq's past with information indicating that a program might still be active. Was Bush to rely on the IAEA? How foolish would that be given their record of underestimating programs in Iraq (in the past) and more recently Iran.
What you indicated is correct; but, to a more specific concern. You need to research thoroughly,
http://www.iraqwatch.org . This is merely a holding engine for more specifics. Not an opinion.
Cause it wasn't just the Brits. It was Italy's intelligence too.The Italians agreed with the Brits?
What you indicated is correct; but, to a more specific concern. You need to research thoroughly, http://www.iraqwatch.org . This is merely a holding engine for more specifics.
I am familiar with this site but tell me what you think I am missing that has you referring me.