Say Anything Blog

George is also peddling his book. What a coincidence.

It seems that every time I hear Michael Savage’s radio show (about 3 times a year is my limit) he’s saying that Tenet should be in prison.

Hmmm.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

We can all look back at that decision now with 20/20 hindsight and say “Well gee, it’s sort of dumb to invade because of WMD’s that don’t exist,” but that statement ignores the fact that just about every politician in the flippin’ country believed Saddam had those WMD’s.

The presence of WMD’s became highly questionable once the UN inspectors went in, had unprecedented access, and no WMD’s.  But “Bring ‘em on” Bush wanted his war, so he went ahead and invaded anyway.  The Bush gang wanted this war so badly that Rumsfeld actually prohibited planning for the occupation.

“Bring ‘em on” Bush wanted his war, so he went ahead and invaded anyway

Will-of-the-Lisp: I’d be perfectly happy to buy some new tin foil for your next hat!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

1. When I was young and especially during my years in the Marine Corps, honor and loyalty were attributes highly valued among real men. Today, in all levels of our society it is very hard to find such men any longer, I am saddened to see how rare it is even among our military leaders, it is all about saving their reputations and using their prior service to their political and financial advantage. Bradley told Patton that military ability and leadership would fade away and be replaced by diplomats and politicians in military clothing, and now that it has arrived we find there is no manhood behind the medals.

2. Will, you are an ignorant ass! Virtually every intelligence agency in the world said Saddam had WMD’s, we know he used them on Kurds and Iranians, Saddam stalled inpsections long enough to get the WMD’s out of the country, and we know he was acquiring more just before the invasion. The U.N. Inspectors did not have unprecedented access, Saddam had stonewalled them for months just prior to the invasion. Lastly, your judgment of Bush is not based on facts, but your extreme Left wing prejudices and BDS.

Will you are worse than an ignorant ass, you are a defeatist!

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Virtually every intelligence agency in the world said Saddam had WMD’s, we know he used them on Kurds and Iranians

No one had good intelligence in 2002, before the UN teams were on site.  Mostly they were just following Bush, for whom, as was famously leaked in the Downing Street memo, “the facts were being fixed around the policy”.  If you really think the pre-intelligence was handled even-handedly by the Bush administration, check out this video, featuring two Republicans discussing pre-war intelligence during Congressional hearings last year (the transcript is incomplete, so you should watch the video).

As far as Saddam using chem weapons on the Iranians, it is indeed despicible.  It is also dispicable that Reagan dispatched Rumsfeld to visit Saddam twice after the US found out about Iraq CW use.  The second visit was necessary so Rumsfeld could personally assure Saddam that, in spite of a recent public state department condemnation of Iraqi CW use, the US didn’t really mind:

Rumsfeld returned to Baghdad in late March 1984. By this time, the U.S. had publicly condemned Iraq’s chemical weapons use, stating, “The United States has concluded that the available evidence substantiates Iran’s charges that Iraq used chemical weapons” [Document 47]. Briefings for Rumsfeld’s meetings noted that atmospherics in Iraq had deteriorated since his December visit because of Iraqi military reverses and because “bilateral relations were sharply set back by our March 5 condemnation of Iraq for CW use, despite our repeated warnings that this issue would emerge sooner or later” [Document 48]. Rumsfeld was to discuss with Iraqi officials the Reagan administration’s hope that it could obtain Export-Import Bank credits for Iraq, the Aqaba pipeline, and its vigorous efforts to cut off arms exports to Iran.

Given that the US winked at the CW use back when it was happening, it’s not a very compelling argument to justify starting a war in 2003, long after the fact.

Will:

Mostly they were just following Bush, for whom, as was famously leaked in the Downing Street memo, “the facts were being fixed around the policy”.

Actually, the “facts” had been fixed at least four years previously.  It was generally accepted by 1998 that Saddam possessed WMDs and was attempting to acquire more.  Do you actually need a URL link for that one?  That world-wide intelligence consensus was left changed until about a month after the end of the war.  Tell me that this isn’t news to you.

It’s also funny you mention the DSM.  Had you actually read the entire memo, instead of a cherry picked phrase, you would have realized that the author of the minutes accepted the reality of Saddam possessing WMD.  Otherwise, why would anybody have worried about the risk posed by Saddam using them on Kuwait

And WTF does a visit to Baghdad in 1984 have to do with anything?  It’s just a poorly constructed non sequitor.

As to the UN inspectors, it’s true they found nothing, and there was nothing (much) to find, but that doesn’t validate their methodology.  I objected to the problems with their inspection methods at the time, even though I was convinced at the time that WMD weren’t a significant threat. 

My explanation at the time was that Iraq was a totalitarian state and that it was very likely that Saddam (who was certainly acting as if he had a viable threat in WMD) really thought that he did, but that, like Hitler’s paper armies, no such WMD existed.

But at least you’re not trying to use that silly argument that the US armed Iraq with those T72 tanks and French Mirages.

Will,

Were those UN inspectors you mentioned the same ones who were on site and “inspecting” in North Korea for 10 years from 1994 forward, or did they all just attend the same United Nations Nuclear Weapons Inspector school together?

I’d be willing to consider taking the United Nations nuclear non-proliferation efforts (IAEA) seriously, if you would simply provide one moderately substantive reason for doing so… wishful thinking aside.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One, that is exactly right.  It appears that the UN Inspectors nearly always come up empty, especially when the “inspectee” gets to make the rules about where and when they get to search (as with Iraq).  This was also my point earlier, when I commented about objecting to their methodology (I use that word loosely when dealing with the UN!).

It appears that the UN Inspectors nearly always come up empty,

But the pay’s good and the benefits are great!

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

It was generally accepted by 1998 that Saddam possessed WMDs and was attempting to acquire more.

You don’t go to war based on buzz, supposition, or rumors.  The evidence we had on Iraq WMD’s was very thin.  You add on top of that absence of corroboration by the weapons inspectors, and the whole WMD thing was just a fig leaf for Bush’s macho obsession with invading Iraq.

With regard to the UN Weapons Inspectors, I would remind you that they found plenty after the first Gulf War, and, in North Korea, the administration has backed off on their earlier claims of a functioning Uranium enrichment program in North Korea.  Anyway, the inspectors never had the level of access to North Korea that they had in Iraq right before Bush started his war.

You don’t go to war based on buzz, supposition, or rumors. 

Oh yes you do, because intelligence is rarely any clearer than that.

I wish people would stop thinking intelligence was some kind of hard science, with ‘slam dunk’ answers.