- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Bush Press Sec Ari Fleischer tries to "call out Iraq war Myths". Believe him or not?
Posted on 3/19/19 at 11:54 pm
Posted on 3/19/19 at 11:54 pm
Twitter thread here. 3 minute read.
LINK
What say you poliboard? Do you believe him or not?
All I know is that regardless of whether they lied about WMD's or not, they clearly did not have a plan for what to do after the invasion and the battle is "won" and what to do about the power vacuum that would take place thereafter and thus stuck us there for nearly two decades and they clearly lied to us about that part of the debacle.
I do know that Bush did not do himself any favors by surrounding himself with a bunch of snakes that loves open ended war like Cheney, Rumsfeld and so on.
IIRC, Colin Powell was the one that was warning caution against this whole mess. Bush should've listened to him.
quote:
The Iraq war began sixteen years ago tomorrow. There is a myth about the war that I have been meaning to set straight for years. After no WMDs were found, the left claimed "Bush lied. People died." This accusation itself is a lie. It's time to put it to rest.
The fact is that President Bush (and I as press secretary) faithfully and accurately reported to the public what the intelligence community concluded.
The CIA, along with the intelligence services of Egypt, France, Israel and others concluded that Saddam had WMD. We all turned out to be wrong. That is very different from lying.
After the war, a bipartisan group was created to determine what went wrong, particularly why the intelligence community's conclusions about Iraq were so different from what was found on the ground after the war.
The group of experts was named the Robb-Silberman commission. It's report was issued in March 2005. It can be found in full here: LINK
The group of experts was named the Robb-Silberman commission. Its report was issued in March 2005. It can be found in full here: LINK
Its key finding was that that a "major intelligence failure" took place. It also stated that no intelligence service was pressured by the Bush Administration to conclude that Saddam had WMDs.
Here are the key quotes from their report: "Overall Commission Finding: The Intelligence Community's performance in assessing Iraq's pre-war weapons of mass destruction programs was a major intelligence failure.
Nuclear Weapons Summary Finding: The Intelligence Community seriously misjudged the status of Iraq's alleged nuclear weapons program in the 2002 NIE and other pre-Iraq war intelligence products.
This misjudgment stemmed chiefly from the Community's failure to analyze correctly Iraq's reasons for attempting to procure high-strength aluminum tubes.
Biological Warfare Summary Finding: The Intelligence Community seriously misjudged the status of Iraq's biological weapons program in the 2002 NIE and other pre-war intelligence products.
The primary reason for this misjudgment was the Intelligence Community's heavy reliance on a human source--codenamed "Curveball"--whose information later proved to be unreliable.
Chemical Warfare Summary Finding: The Intelligence Community erred in its 2002 NIE assessment of Iraq's alleged chemical warfare program.
The Community's substantial overestimation of Iraq's chemical warfare program was due chiefly to flaws in analysis and the paucity of quality information collected.
In the case of Iraq, collectors of intelligence absorbed the prevailing analytic consensus and tended to reject or ignore contrary information. The result was "tunnel vision" focusing on the Intelligence Community's existing assumptions.
The Intelligence Community did not make or change any analytic judgments in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion, but the pervasive conventional wisdom that Saddam retained WMD affected the analytic process.
The CIA took too long to admit error in Iraq, and its Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and Arms Control Center actively discouraged analysts from investigating errors.
Finally, we closely examined the possibility that intelligence analysts were pressured by policymakers to change their judgments about Iraq's nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs.
The analysts who worked Iraqi weapons issues universally agreed that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments."
That is what the investigators reported, after been given full access to people throughout the intelligence community.
Which leads me to conclude that there was a liar and his name was Saddam Hussein. He created an elaborate system of lies to fool western intelligence services and he succeeded. He wanted us to believe he had WMDs.
The allegaton that "Bush lied. People died" is a liberal myth created to politically target President Bush. I understand the anger that was felt after no WMDs were found.
But that doesn't justify calling the President a liar. I can only hope that serious historians and other experts do their homework and resist falling for this myth.
LINK
What say you poliboard? Do you believe him or not?
All I know is that regardless of whether they lied about WMD's or not, they clearly did not have a plan for what to do after the invasion and the battle is "won" and what to do about the power vacuum that would take place thereafter and thus stuck us there for nearly two decades and they clearly lied to us about that part of the debacle.
I do know that Bush did not do himself any favors by surrounding himself with a bunch of snakes that loves open ended war like Cheney, Rumsfeld and so on.
IIRC, Colin Powell was the one that was warning caution against this whole mess. Bush should've listened to him.
This post was edited on 3/19/19 at 11:59 pm
Posted on 3/19/19 at 11:56 pm to Sentrius
quote:
All I know is that regardless of whether they lied or not, they clearly did not have a plan for what to do after the invasion and the battle is "won" and what to do about the power vacuum that would take place thereafter and thus stuck us there for nearly two decades and they clearly lied to us about that part of the debacle.
I do know that Bush did not do himself any favors by surrounding himself with a bunch of snakes that loves open ended war like Cheney, Rumsfeld and so on.
and I'm young enough and honest enough to admit, at the time, post 9/11 and WAY more politically naive, I was eating that shite up. Was a huge Neocon without knowing it.
This post was edited on 3/19/19 at 11:57 pm
Posted on 3/19/19 at 11:59 pm to Sentrius
quote:I actually believe this but the question is what kind of pressure (if any) the administration applied to the intelligence community to deliver the the results that it wanted.
The fact is that President Bush (and I as press secretary) faithfully and accurately reported to the public what the intelligence community concluded.
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 12:01 am
Posted on 3/19/19 at 11:59 pm to Sentrius
I have absolutely no way of knowing if they lied or not.
At the time, I believed them 100%. But, as time has gone on, I've gotten more and more cynical when it comes to government.
Now, I always just assume they lie.
At the time, I believed them 100%. But, as time has gone on, I've gotten more and more cynical when it comes to government.
Now, I always just assume they lie.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 11:59 pm to jessieventura9
quote:
jessieventura9
quote:
60 posts
quote:
member since February 2019
Oh you seem like you're going to be a fun one.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:00 am to stuntman
quote:
I have absolutely no way of knowing if they lied or not.
At the time, I believed them 100%. But, as time has gone on, I've gotten more and more cynical when it comes to government.
Now, I always just assume they lie.
Agree 100%
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:02 am to Sentrius
quote:
Do you believe him or not?
No.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:02 am to 225bred
I think there are a whole lot of people out there like us. I wish the numbers would grow faster, though.
Distrust in government is a good thing for society.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:03 am to Sentrius
quote:
The allegaton that "Bush lied. People died" is a liberal myth created to politically target President Bush. I understand the anger that was felt after no WMDs were found.
But that doesn't justify calling the President a liar. I can only hope that serious historians and other experts do their homework and resist falling for this myth.
Yeah I believe that and I do not have a problem with that. What I have a problem with is the Bush administration and the Pentagon not being on the same page about dissolving the Iraqi army, police forces, etc after and them not having a solid plan to rebuild Iraq. Another thing I have a problem with is our leaders in Washington did not learn from this disaster and Obama repeated the mistake in Libya, Egypt, and Syria. Hopefully, Trump resists the calls from the warhawks in both parties and does not get us militarily involved in Venezuela or other messes.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:04 am to Sentrius
quote:
The CIA, along with the intelligence services of Egypt, France, Israel and others concluded that Saddam had WMD. We all turned out to be wrong.
We weren’t wrong. You can choose to believe me or not, but we were not wrong.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:05 am to stuntman
quote:
Distrust in government is a good thing for society.
I both agree, and disagree.
A government such as ours is worthy of distrust, but this trickles down in to an overall societal distrust, which is not good at all.
A properly formed government (and not a State) should and will be trustworthy, and the opposite effects will be felt.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:11 am to HempHead
Do you think it's the government that is creating the distrust, or is it the decay of society?
I think politics is downstream of culture.
I think politics is downstream of culture.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:13 am to stuntman
The latter, and I agree with you.
ETA: I know you're a fellow ancap (whatever that means these days), but I used to think that government in general was an inherently parasitic and unjust enterprise, but I've come to realize that the shape it takes is a reflection of the society it oversees. IMO, a Hoppean take on private law and society is the best answer to mitigate this, but who the hell knows.
ETA: I know you're a fellow ancap (whatever that means these days), but I used to think that government in general was an inherently parasitic and unjust enterprise, but I've come to realize that the shape it takes is a reflection of the society it oversees. IMO, a Hoppean take on private law and society is the best answer to mitigate this, but who the hell knows.
This post was edited on 3/20/19 at 12:15 am
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:16 am to stuntman
Gov't doesn't create anything dogg. Well maybe it condones abortions.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:16 am to Sentrius
quote:
Which leads me to conclude that there was a liar and his name was Saddam Hussein. He created an elaborate system of lies to fool western intelligence services and he succeeded. He wanted us to believe he had WMDs
Amazing. Incredible that Saddam Hussein could fool multiple intelligence officials and analysts by just saying "Yeah, I have WMDs."
As Robert McNamara said in the Fog of War, "we see what we want to believe." If Fleischer's ultimate conclusion is that they were led astray by an admitted enemy, shouldn't that have been self-evident from the beginning? I mean, his conclusion is effectively that of a toddler who's seen a magic trick or something.
The blowback of the Iraq War has been massive. From millions of civilian deaths to the deaths of American and coalition soldiers to the open distrust of the intelligence community to the rise of new terrorist groups to the rise of a geopolitical environment that seemed impossible in 1999, among other things, and all for what? The US can't even compel the Iraqis, who are our supposed ally, to distance themselves from the Iranians.
I honestly can't believe that Fleischer has the audacity to defend himself, Bush, or his administration, in light of the fact that American soldiers effectively died for no reason, by his own admission. He should be embarrassed of himself.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:19 am to Sentrius
quote:
What say you poliboard? Do you believe him or not?
I 100% agree with him. Intel was WRONG. I disagreed with going to war with Hussein. It was not necessary.
We have seen that our intelligence agencies need more work on their skills.
We need better verification tools. If we plan to go to war or investigate a prez campaign the evidence MUST be solid. IF the evidence id doubtful, then wait.
Patience will be your friend. Hussein was not threatening the US, so no need to go to war on questionable intel.
Trump did NOT collude with the Russians, no need to investigate based on unreliable accusations.
Once we went to war, there was no turning back, so I supported the troops, and always will. I had little faith in our intel agencies which is why I disagreed with going to war.
Posted on 3/20/19 at 12:19 am to HempHead
quote:
but I've come to realize that the shape it takes is a reflection of the society it oversees
Yep.
I watched a lecture by Lawrence Reed a few years back on this very issue. It's so obvious, but something I hadn't even considered before.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News