The Senate Phase 2 report on misuse of available intel on Iraqi WMD-Is it high-treason?

[Darius11 12]

Any one see it or read about it?


From what i have seen and read it basicly more proof that we were lied too about the war in Iraq.

The decision was made and the facts were bent to fit that decision. (Some thing most of us knew, but few still didn’t)

Can anyone support this administration and still be considered logical, rational, moral, ethical, or even patriot?

Is what the administration did high high-treason?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[quade 4]

Quote

Is what the administration did high high-treason?

No. It was crimes against humanity worthy of an international tribunal on war crimes, but that's never going to happen either.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

Is what the administration did high high-treason?

No. It was crimes against humanity worthy of an international tribunal on war crimes, but that's never going to happen either.

If Obama wants to increase foreign relations he can allow it to happen and never pardon the current administration. It's possible since he has gone on record that he won't pardon a former friend in Tony Rezko and that he would have his AG investigate this administration.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Any one see it or read about it?


From what i have seen and read it basicly more proof that we were lied too about the war in Iraq.

The decision was made and the facts were bent to fit that decision. (Some thing most of us knew, but few still didn’t)

Can anyone support this administration and still be considered logical, rational, moral, ethical, or even patriot?

Is what the administration did high high-treason?

Serious question

How do you square away all of your comment here with the fact that the same claims Bush made, were made by the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer and many others BEFORE Bush was even a canidate for the office?

Help me underestand how you view this?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 4]

Quote

Serious question

How do you square away all of your comment here with the fact that the same claims Bush made, were made by the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer and many others BEFORE Bush was even a canidate for the office?

Help me underestand how you view this?

Serious answer.

I may suspect my next door neighbor is a homicidal maniac. I may have seen him do things I though were suspicious. He may have left his window curtain open and I may have seen what I thought was a large stockpile of guns he could use to kill me in my sleep. I may have mentioned it numerous times to my other next door neighbor and that neighbor may have agreed with me.

It still doesn't give me the right nor does it make me right to go over and kill him and his family.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Serious question

How do you square away all of your comment here with the fact that the same claims Bush made, were made by the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer and many others BEFORE Bush was even a canidate for the office?

Help me underestand how you view this?

Serious answer.

I may suspect my next door neighbor is a homicidal maniac. I may have seen him do things I though were suspicious. He may have left his window curtain open and I may have seen what I thought was a large stockpile of guns he could use to kill me in my sleep. I may have mentioned it numerous times to my other next door neighbor and that neighbor may have agreed with me.

It still doesn't give me the right nor does it make me right to go over and kill him and his family.

Nice bull shit.

dont have an aswer you care to give, dont post

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Serious question

How do you square away all of your comment here with the fact that the same claims Bush made, were made by the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer and many others BEFORE Bush was even a canidate for the office?

Help me underestand how you view this?

First I am not a Bush basher even if I do bash him it is not because of a loyalty I have to the democrats but I see him as a major fuck up.


I do understand your question and I hold all the war supporters responsible.
I hold all the people who minimized the UN inspectors responsible.
I hold all the people who made questioning the approach to the war feel like treason responsible. BUT

The person in charge is in charge for a reason. Now I understand that any leader can make mistakes however when it is shown that the information was withheld or manipulated it shows intent.
I don’t know if the information was filtered to the others as it does look like only what would serve the purpose of war was shown or concentrated on.

Every one has some responsibility however just like any other group or organization the leader who made the decisions is the one held responsible and that is in cases where no one was misled or manipulated.

I think if before people just thought GWB was stupid or made a mistake now it looks like we were all played and lied too.
I think that’s what makes the big difference. That our leader lied to us and that lie ended up hurting the country and our people.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Serious question

How do you square away all of your comment here with the fact that the same claims Bush made, were made by the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer and many others BEFORE Bush was even a canidate for the office?

Help me underestand how you view this?

First I am not a Bush basher even if I do bash him it is not because of a loyalty I have to the democrats but I see him as a major fuck up.


I do understand your question and I hold all the war supporters responsible.
I hold all the people who minimized the UN inspectors responsible.
I hold all the people who made questioning the approach to the war feel like treason responsible. BUT

The person in charge is in charge for a reason. Now I understand that any leader can make mistakes however when it is shown that the information was withheld or manipulated it shows intent.
I don’t know if the information was filtered to the others as it does look like only what would serve the purpose of war was shown or concentrated on.

Every one has some responsibility however just like any other group or organization the leader who made the decisions is the one held responsible and that is in cases where no one was misled or manipulated.

I think if before people just thought GWB was stupid or made a mistake now it looks like we were all played and lied too.
I think that’s what makes the big difference. That our leader lied to us and that lie ended up hurting the country and our people.

So why did all the others, prior to Bush, make the same claims? If Bush was/is lieing about all of this what were the others doing and why?

Did they all lie and manipulate too? If so, for what reasons?

And then, to top id off, the Bush bashers speak of WMD's as the ONLY reason. There were 23 if I remember corretly.

I would gladly have the debate on the fact. But this frothing at the mouth rabid hatred just makes me smile and shake my head.

You know, just like quades reply....

by the way, thanks for a good reply. I do not feel you answered it really but, at least there was respect in your reply

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,008]

>So why did all the others, prior to Bush, make the same claims?

Many did. Only one person used those reasons as an excuse to go to war.

The issue is not what people SAID. The issue is what one person DID.

>And then, to top id off, the Bush bashers speak of WMD's as the ONLY
>reason. There were 23 if I remember corretly.

Yep. Heck, by the end of the year, I bet there are 30! Right wingers have excelled at rewriting history on this one.

The issue that has been brought forth by this report is not new, but it does confirm what many people have been saying. Intelligence was intentionally distorted and mis-stated to justify a war.

Now, as you mention, politicians distort and mis-state the issues all the time. That's wrong. But doing that and using it to justify killing tens of thousands of innocent people is worse. Surely even you can see that.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>So why did all the others, prior to Bush, make the same claims?

Many did. Only one person used those reasons as an excuse to go to war.

The issue is not what people SAID. The issue is what one person DID.

>And then, to top id off, the Bush bashers speak of WMD's as the ONLY
>reason. There were 23 if I remember corretly.

Yep. Heck, by the end of the year, I bet there are 30! Right wingers have excelled at rewriting history on this one.

The issue that has been brought forth by this report is not new, but it does confirm what many people have been saying. Intelligence was intentionally distorted and mis-stated to justify a war.

Now, as you mention, politicians distort and mis-state the issues all the time. That's wrong. But doing that and using it to justify killing tens of thousands of innocent people is worse. Surely even you can see that.

I reject your premise.

Some people have the ability to ask a question or make a point that is framed in a way that can not be answered anyother way than what they (and in this case you) want.

Skillful? Maybe. Less than honest? .......

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,008]

>I reject your premise.

That's fine. With this report, and other reports, and firsthand testimony about this from insiders in the administration, there is no longer much doubt as to what actually happened. You are, of course, free to reject it (and I suspect you will, no matter what.)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>I reject your premise.

That's fine. With this report, and other reports, and firsthand testimony about this from insiders in the administration, there is no longer much doubt as to what actually happened. You are, of course, free to reject it (and I suspect you will, no matter what.)

Please sir, supply me with this difinitive information.

Just list these "reports" if you want and I will look them up myself.

I do of course remember the reports where many took pieces and parts and posted the parts they liked and omited others.

I await your list

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,030]

Quote

Quote

>So why did all the others, prior to Bush, make the same claims?

Many did. Only one person used those reasons as an excuse to go to war.

The issue is not what people SAID. The issue is what one person DID.

>And then, to top id off, the Bush bashers speak of WMD's as the ONLY
>reason. There were 23 if I remember corretly.

Yep. Heck, by the end of the year, I bet there are 30! Right wingers have excelled at rewriting history on this one.

The issue that has been brought forth by this report is not new, but it does confirm what many people have been saying. Intelligence was intentionally distorted and mis-stated to justify a war.

Now, as you mention, politicians distort and mis-state the issues all the time. That's wrong. But doing that and using it to justify killing tens of thousands of innocent people is worse. Surely even you can see that.

I reject your premise.

Well, there's a surprise. I bet you've really upset him now!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>So why did all the others, prior to Bush, make the same claims?

Many did. Only one person used those reasons as an excuse to go to war.

The issue is not what people SAID. The issue is what one person DID.

Bush did not act alone.

The President wanted to go to war with Iraq.
Congress wanted to go to war with Iraq.
The people wanted to go to war with Iraq.

It was a pretty universal move, notably excepting peace activists in places like SF. But in 2002/2003, they were a distinct minority in the country.

Really the quibbling is over the propoganda the White House used - Bill, do you really want to tell me you believed that was the reason at the time they were selling it? I know that you, and Congress, knew the full score.

So is it high treason? Not remotely. War crimes? Going to war is not a crime, esp with a dictator who violated treaties after invading (and brutalizing) a neighbor. However, if it can be established that war crimes were committed during this war (particularly with POW/enemy combatants), then maybe there is a bone to pick. However, I doubt Congress would make such a finding, and the UN does not have legitimate authority on this subject to sieze our ex President.

[billvon 3,008]

>Bush did not act alone.

He did indeed act alone.

He did not TALK alone, but he did ACT alone. No one else in the US ordered troops into combat. The responsibility is his, and his alone. If he didn't want the responsibility, it would have been wise to either not start the war, or to step aside and allow someone else to make the tough decisions.

Now, had Congress declared war, that would have been a different story; he would have been acting under their direction. However, he did not do that. Instead, he asked for an "authorization for the use of force" when needed to defend the US. The meat of the request was:

"The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq"

In other words, Congress said "do your job as Commander in Chief."

He then made the decision to go to war.

It is indeed ironic that some of the very same conservatives who were once trumpeting the bravery and determination of GWB in the face of terrorism are now complaining "but . . . but . . . the war wasn't his fault! Other people were wrong too!" (Not directed at you, just in general.)

[billvon 3,008]

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/Iraq.html
http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775

Quick summary of the second:

The Committee’s report cites several conclusions in which the Administration’s public statements were NOT supported by the intelligence. They include:

Ø Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa’ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.

Ø Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.

Ø Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.

Ø Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq’s chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community’s uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.

Ø The Secretary of Defense’s statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.

Ø The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Bush did not act alone.

He did indeed act alone.

He did not TALK alone, but he did ACT alone. No one else in the US ordered troops into combat. The responsibility is his, and his alone. If he didn't want the responsibility, it would have been wise to either not start the war, or to step aside and allow someone else to make the tough decisions.

Now, had Congress declared war, that would have been a different story; he would have been acting under their direction. However, he did not do that. Instead, he asked for an "authorization for the use of force" when needed to defend the US. The meat of the request was:

"The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq"

In other words, Congress said "do your job as Commander in Chief."

He then made the decision to go to war.

It is indeed ironic that some of the very same conservatives who were once trumpeting the bravery and determination of GWB in the face of terrorism are now complaining "but . . . but . . . the war wasn't his fault! Other people were wrong too!" (Not directed at you, just in general.)

*golf clap* At least someone's finally learned the difference between "declaring war" and "authorizing force".

If Bush acted alone in sending the troops, then it is equally valid to say that Congress is "acting alone" in continuing to fund them. So much for the promises to 'get our troops out of Iraq' from 2 years ago.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,008]

>If Bush acted alone in sending the troops, then it is equally valid to say
>that Congress is "acting alone" in continuing to fund them. So much for
>the promises to 'get our troops out of Iraq' from 2 years ago.

I agree. Congress is being somewhat spineless. I can understand their reluctance - sentencing tens of thousands of US soldiers to death by not funding them should be the very last resort, always. But they've had two years to come up with an alternative solution, and so far all they've done is talk about it (and pass more funding bills.)

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>If Bush acted alone in sending the troops, then it is equally valid to say
>that Congress is "acting alone" in continuing to fund them. So much for
>the promises to 'get our troops out of Iraq' from 2 years ago.

I agree. Congress is being somewhat spineless. I can understand their reluctance - sentencing tens of thousands of US soldiers to death by not funding them should be the very last resort, always. But they've had two years to come up with an alternative solution, and so far all they've done is talk about it (and pass more funding bills.)

Agreed.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>Bush did not act alone.

He did indeed act alone.

He did not TALK alone, but he did ACT alone. No one else in the US ordered troops into combat. The responsibility is his, and his alone. If he didn't want the responsibility, it would have been wise to either not start the war, or to step aside and allow someone else to make the tough decisions.

Now, had Congress declared war, that would have been a different story; he would have been acting under their direction. However, he did not do that. Instead, he asked for an "authorization for the use of force" when needed to defend the US. The meat of the request was:

That's as close as we get to a declaration of war these days. When Bush Sr. sent troops into Somalia, that was acting alone. Shrub got a resolution, was quite clear about what he intended to do, and then did it. There was plenty of opportunity for Congress to choose to stop it, if they actually wanted to. It took months to mass the forces and pretend to give Hussein a chance to yield.

The entire nation (at least 80%) has to take responsibilty for 2003-2004. A much smaller portion, but still all of Congress (besides Barbara Lee), needs to take it for what's happened since.

[billvon 3,008]

>There was plenty of opportunity for Congress to choose to stop it, if
>they actually wanted to.

No, actually there wasn't. Once Bush orders the military to do something, there is no constitutional means for Congress to countermand that order. They can withhold funding, of course, and they can impeach him, but they cannot tell the military to ignore him.

>It took months to mass the forces and pretend to give Hussein a chance to yield.

Glad you recognize what was really going on there.

[Darius11 12]

I think what is very important to remember is the information that was given to the others was false and manipulated. We were told over and over again that the treat was immanent by this administration. Now it looks like they only focused on the information that would lead to war and ignored anything that did not follow their plan to start the war.

In this case the people who manipulated the information was this administration.
The people who look to have started a false war are the people in this administration. That’s why they are to blame.

If I run to you and lie “that your house is on fire” you will call the fire department. The person at fault is me who lied specially because I knew what your reaction would be.

They used the sympathy and fear the people had and told us over and over again that not only is the threat immanent but it might even be nuclear.


I don't know if people have short memories or selective ones, but we were all used republicans, democrats, and independent we were ALL lied too.

If I was a Bush supporter or a war supporter who believed in the Iraq war 5 years ago I would be more pissed then the people who argued it from the start.

Basically this administration used fear, and peoples since of patriotism to start a war.


I think we should all be pissed and want justice for the hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Serious question

How do you square away all of your comment here with the fact that the same claims Bush made, were made by the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer and many others BEFORE Bush was even a canidate for the office?

Help me underestand how you view this?

Serious answer.

I may suspect my next door neighbor is a homicidal maniac. I may have seen him do things I though were suspicious. He may have left his window curtain open and I may have seen what I thought was a large stockpile of guns he could use to kill me in my sleep. I may have mentioned it numerous times to my other next door neighbor and that neighbor may have agreed with me.

It still doesn't give me the right nor does it make me right to go over and kill him and his family.

Nice bull shit.

dont have an aswer you care to give, dont post

Really? That's the most intelligent response you can muster? You can't actually see that mere suspicion is different than taking actions that result in the death of others?

You're hopelessly devoted to a war criminal.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 23]

Who manipulated it before Bush?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Serious question

How do you square away all of your comment here with the fact that the same claims Bush made, were made by the Clintons, Kerry, Kennedy, Schumer and many others BEFORE Bush was even a canidate for the office?

Help me underestand how you view this?

Serious answer.

I may suspect my next door neighbor is a homicidal maniac. I may have seen him do things I though were suspicious. He may have left his window curtain open and I may have seen what I thought was a large stockpile of guns he could use to kill me in my sleep. I may have mentioned it numerous times to my other next door neighbor and that neighbor may have agreed with me.

It still doesn't give me the right nor does it make me right to go over and kill him and his family.

Nice bull shit.

dont have an aswer you care to give, dont post

Really? That's the most intelligent response you can muster? You can't actually see that mere suspicion is different than taking actions that result in the death of others?

You're hopelessly devoted to a war criminal.

I am still waiting for an answer to my question!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln