@GazaAli said:
And by the way, even if this was true, its still complete hogwash. People and states alike should be held accountable for their mistakes its really simple. You don't kill someone and say "gee sorry I didn't mean to". So even if we were to agree that the U.S was really fed bad intel and acted accordingly, that doesn't exempt it and anyone that was involved in the decision to go to war with Iraq from accountability. For **** sake you don't get thousands of people killed and destroy an entire country and then say "lol sorry, my bad".
Besides how do you mistake a country for having WMD? I would under the right circumstances be willing to accept a scenario where a state FAILED to realize the existence of such a thing within another country, even though its exceedingly hard to believe that a state can enrich Uranium and build a nuclear silo without anyone noticing. But how do you obtain knowledge of something only to find out it didn't exist? What is this sorcery?
First of all I agree the Iraq War was a mistake, though I do believe 50 years down the road we may see it differently, depending.
As an anonymous intelligence professional I can tell you people outside of our realm have little insight at all about how things are done. I am not even talking about classified processes here, just in general it is ignorance. There is always a probability of error, it just all depends what you are planning on doing and what the risks are of either not acting at all vs. acting and being wrong. I was, of course, not in the room when President Bush said "GO", but I guarantee the thought process was one of "if we are right and do not act the risks far outweigh the penalty of being wrong and acting."
A few points I would like you and others who think this was all fabricated to consider:
1. Debriefs with generals in Iraq revealed they believed Saddam had a nuclear program. Saddam Hussein himself revealed he lied about having WMD's in order to intimidate neighbors.
2. This next one is all about common sense and critical thinking. If the Bush administration knew there were no WMD's in Iraq why use that as the excuse to go to war? And if they insisted on using that excuse anyway why not just plant the evidence? Why would a 1st term president commit political suicide with a lie that would get thousands of American troops killed? If he truly knew there was no evidence of WMD's (there were WMD's, just not the yellow cake powder variety) would he not know he would be eventually busted in that lie when we did not find them? Do you really think the backup plan was "we'll just say bad intel"? Iraq had already violated over a dozen of the UNSC resolutions, surely we could have used that alone to go back into Iraq, why all the drama?
What is funny is a lot of the same crowd who believes this conspiracy also believe 9/11 was an inside job. So we could pull off 9/11 but we could not plant some evidence of yellow cake powder or anything else related to nuclear ambitions?
3. Numerous countries around the world were also convinced Iraq had WMD's and shared intel with us revealing as much.
4. The intelligence world is not like in the movies, I assure you. It is not sexy, it is rarely exciting, basically it is just a bunch of geeks who play WoW sitting in front of computers. People just like you on this forum believe it or not. It can actually be quite boring most of the time. I have yet to see anything that would constitute any bit of a conspiracy. But of course being part of the machine the nuts out there will just say I am waging information warfare on you right now with my jedi mind tricks.
Anyway, yes the premise the Iraq war was based on ended up being wrong and we along with the Iraqi people ended up eating a shit sandwich, one they are still chomping on. It sucks. But in no way, shape, or form was going into Iraq based on lies or deliberately false information.
Log in to comment