NEWSWEEK: From Downing Street to Capitol Hill - Now confirmed Up High
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 04:09:22 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  NEWSWEEK: From Downing Street to Capitol Hill - Now confirmed Up High
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: NEWSWEEK: From Downing Street to Capitol Hill - Now confirmed Up High  (Read 995 times)
freedomburns
FreedomBurns
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,237


Political Matrix
E: -7.23, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 16, 2005, 05:33:41 AM »

June 15 - Two senior British government officials today acknowledged as authentic a series of 2002 pre-Iraq war memos stating that Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program was "effectively frozen" and that there was "no recent evidence" of Iraqi ties to international terrorism—private conclusions that contradicted two key pillars of the Bush administration's public case for the invasion in March 2003.

A March 8, 2002, secret "options" paper prepared by Prime Minister Tony Blair's top national-security aides also stated that intelligence on Saddam's purported weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was "poor." While noting that Saddam had used such weapons in the past and could do so again "if his regime were threatened," the options paper concluded "there is no greater threat now than in recent years that Saddam will use WMD."

The options paper was written just one month before Blair met with President Bush in Crawford, Texas. According to another leaked internal memo, Blair agreed at the meeting to support a U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam’s regime provided that “certain conditions” were met. Those conditions, according to the newly leaked memo, were that efforts be made to “construct a coalition” and “shape” public opinion; that the Israeli-Palestinian crisis was “quiescent,” and that attempts to eliminate Iraqi WMD through the return of United Nations weapons inspectors be exhausted.

The British documents are becoming something of a cause celebre among Capitol Hill Democrats and other critics of the Iraq war who see them as evidence that the Bush administration had privately committed to an invasion far earlier than it has publicly acknowledged—and then “fixed” the intelligence about Iraq to justify the policy.

{emphasis added}

SOURCE: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8234762/site/newsweek/
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2005, 04:06:59 PM »

Well, according to the story:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

If true, it shows that the believed Saddam had WMD's, though not nuclear weapons.

If this "proof" is accurate, it show that believed there were WMD's in Iraq.
Logged
chris allen
Rookie
**
Posts: 60


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2005, 04:35:44 PM »

I'm surprised this hasn't gotten more coverage in the media.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2005, 05:18:20 PM »

I'm surprised this hasn't gotten more coverage in the media.

Well, it's kinda hard to claim that this is a bombshell when what's been released shows that Blair was worried Iraq using WMD's.  It undercuts the argument that they were trying to pull something.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,734


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2005, 07:56:22 PM »

I'm surprised this hasn't gotten more coverage in the media.

Well, it's kinda hard to claim that this is a bombshell when what's been released shows that Blair was worried Iraq using WMD's.  It undercuts the argument that they were trying to pull something.

Talk about missing the point.

The points are
 1. Bush had been planning on invading Iraq long before he announced it, in fact as early as 1999.
2. Bush hadn't been paying that much attention to fighting terrorism
3. One British memo talks about how to make "regime change be legal", since they knew it was illegal.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 11 queries.