3 ms·
> What did they know that Colin Powell did not? Rhetorical question? WRT Iraq, it was public knowledge that: a) Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, indeed Iraq
by specialist 5y ago
> What did they know that Colin Powell did not?
Rhetorical question?
WRT Iraq, it was public knowledge that:
a) Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, indeed Iraq and al Qaeda were idealogical opponents.
b) Iraq had no "weapons of mass destruction"; cite Hans Blix, others.
c) Iraqi leader Hussein had completely capitulated, meaning GWB had effectively won without firing a single shot.
d) Bush Admin and their sources were lying and didn't care that every one knew they were lying.
WRT Afghanistan, I don't readily recall what intelligence failures were publicly known at the time. Complicity of Pakistan's ISI. Allowing bin Laden to escape. The tar pit of dealing with Taliban, the misc war lords of the Northern Alliance.
Many objected to Bush Admin's focus on Iraq at the expense of the Afghanistan effort.
Many more objected to Bush Admin's violation of the Powell Doctrine, in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Many pointed out the advocates for invading Iraq, mostly the neo-cons (aka chickenhawks), simply wanted war, regime change, and so forth. They'd said as much for over a decade. They seized the crisis of 9/11 to enact their plans. It was all very audacious and unapologetic.
- tarsinge 5y agoInsightful comment. Regarding: > Many pointed out the advocates for invading Iraq, mostly the neo-cons Don’t forget Biden who ultimately co signed the act.
- dragonwriter 5y agoBiden voted for the act which required Bush to make certain determinations, which he did in bad faith. While we can (and I did at the time) argue that the bad faith was predictable, supporting the law is still different than actively perpetrating the bad faith determination to initiate the war.
- TomSwirly 5y ago"I'm going to give the crazy guy the gun, and let him choose whether to kill all these people, and it's not my fault." So tired of this idea that powerful people are free of responsibility for their actions. Biden VOTED FOR THE ACT which everyone knew was bullshit and hundreds of thousands of innocent people died.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> So tired of this idea that powerful people are free of responsibility for their actions That's irrelevant; distinguishing between distinctly different acts is not absolving either of liability; in fact, I explicitly noted the basis of moral liability for each of the distinguished acts.
- belter 5y agoAnd Tony Blair...
- rdl 5y ago> b) Iraq had no "weapons of mass destruction"; cite Hans Blix, others. I think that overstates the case. There was no good proof they did have those weapons, and a lot of stuff was fabricated or blown out of proportion to support their having them, but there was also a lot of reason to suspect they had them (including that we/our allies had supplied them to Saddam the past!...plus prior use against the Kurds and Shia). I think the consensus opinion now is that Saddam was trying to make others (especially within Iraq) believe he had a viable WMD capability, but that he didn't have an active program at the time of invasion.
- specialist 5y agoIf the Bush Admin had found any such weapons, they would have bragged about it.