Why would Bush want to cover it up and have his reputation sullied that he “lied about WMD’s”? This makes no sense.
But he did.
The only reason that makes sense to me is there was a desire for a transition of power to the democrats.
Because he was a god-damned liberal fixated on the destruction of the republican party? “We’re all socialists now.”
i agree. why would the bush admin admit publicly that there were no WMD’s when they were finding them all over the place?
One possible answer is that he really is as stupid as the liberals say he is... though not for the reasons they choose to talk about.
Rather than a devious plot by Bush to cover it up, I think it was more a failure to go over the heads of the Democrat Publicity machine ( a.k.a. the "Press")
I wonder if a lot of it has to do with what Bush Sr. did to support Iraq during the Iraq/Iran War (giving weapons illegally?); as well as the protection of the office of the President by continuing to suppress the truth regarding the Oklahoma bombing as well as the first attack on the World Trade Center in NYC.
Should I take off my foil hat now?
Why doesn't someone ask George Bush that very thing..?
Are we THAT afraid of our politicians..?
Well...never mind....I really don't care anymore...
Because the Saudis that own him told him to do so.
1.) The existence of the weapons was not widely know among the insurgency. The administration wanted us to actively look for them but didn't want the insurgents to be looking for them as well.
2.) The liberals had the the upper hand by getting out a head of the debate over whether they weapons existed or not. The administration didn't want to engage in an uphill battle rehashing the debate over the reasons for war and instead wanted to focus on the path forward (the surge, keeping troops there, training Iraqis, etc...)
IIRC there was evidence that some of these WMD came from our allies.
Think France.
I read this here many years ago.
The Secret U.S. Casualties of Iraq’s Abandoned Chemical Weapons
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3215255/posts
[Never let them see you bleed.]
The giveaway was the Democrats sounding so sure there were no WMD -- why weren't they afraid the Bush admin would do as the Russians claimed we would and fabricate wmd?
Wouldn't be prudent. /s
absolutely
I think because in some cases the WMD were so dangerous due to age that they had to leave them in place and just seal them up rather than take the risk of attempting to remove/destroy them. That would not have gone over any better, so they let the press overplay their hand.
In the army we had a phrase for that: "Need to know".........
Whatever the reason was, it reinforces my respect for President Bush that all the choices he made were for the country and not making it about himself........
This really isn't earth shattering news anyway, in fact, it's old news...
Syria's Chemical Weapons Came From Saddam's Iraq
Pentagon announces 500 tons of Uranium shipped from Iraq to Canada