Bush and Officials Lied leading up to Iraq war

[Alucard]

I believe that statement is entirely incorrect. You are unable to support it... but you have a long and pathetic history of following me around this site spreading inaccuracies. this is certainly true to form, if nothing else.

This is true.... RGS is the official usmb troll... he does the same to me and others...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This is true.... RGS is the official usmb troll... he does the same to me and others...

There ya go Maineman, remind me how I never go against other Conservatives, you have one supporting you for no other reason then it is me. But back to the subject, which is it?

 

[maineman]

I want it on record right now.... which statement is yours.... "Bush Lied" or " I believe Bush lied" go ahead those are your choices.

Further you have no evidence except semantics, so that ruins all that " the evidence shows" claims. If the Evidence actually existed Bush would be Impeached. One of the investigations into his supposed lying would have actually stated he lied. You have nothing BUT your OPINION. So go ahead tell us which is it.... "Bush Lied" or " I believe Bush Lied"?

First...my "choices" are certainly not solely determined by YOU, you ******* moron.

How about this: I believe that Bush lied. All the testimony I have heard or read leads me to that conclusion. All that I have read clearly states that the intelligence reports the Bush administration received from their own intelligence agencies contained caveats and qualifiers. If that is true, and I have not seen you bring forth one scintilla of anything to suggest it is not, then the conclusion that Bush and his administration made statements that served to convey a false impression is pretty much inescapable. Please explain how you can come to a different conclusion if you believe that all those analysts are telling the truth... or are you claiming that your hero is telling the truth and all of the analysts are liars?

 

[maineman]

There ya go Maineman, remind me how I never go against other Conservatives, you have one supporting you for no other reason then it is me. But back to the subject, which is it?

I have no doubt that your troll behavior annoys more than just liberals.... but it has little to do with your politics, and much to do with your annoying, dishonest personality.

 

[Alpha1]

First...my "choices" are certainly not solely determined by YOU, you ******* moron.

How about this: I believe that Bush lied. All the testimony I have heard or read leads me to that conclusion. All that I have read clearly states that the intelligence reports the Bush administration received from their own intelligence agencies contained caveats and qualifiers. If that is true, and I have not seen you bring forth one scintilla of anything to suggest it is not, then the conclusion that Bush and his administration made statements that served to convey a false impression is pretty much inescapable. Please explain how you can come to a different conclusion if you believe that all those analysts are telling the truth... or are you claiming that your hero is telling the truth and all of the analysts are liars?

The following excerpts from an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate

http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html


Key Judgments [from October 2002 NIE]

Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction

We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these Key Judgments.)

We judge that we are seeing only a portion of Iraq's WMD efforts, owing to Baghdad's vigorous denial and deception efforts. Revelations after the Gulf war starkly demonstrate the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq to deny information. We lack specific information on many key aspects of Iraq's WMD programs.

Since inspections ended in 1998, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort, energized its missile program, and invested more heavily in biological weapons; in the view of most agencies, Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.

* Iraq's growing ability to sell oil illicitly increases Baghdad's capabilities to finance WMD programs; annual earnings in cash and goods have more than quadrupled, from $580 million in 1998 to about $3 billion this year.

* Iraq has largely rebuilt missile and biological weapons facilities damaged during Operation Desert Fox and has expanded its chemical and biological infrastructure under the cover of civilian production.

* Baghdad has exceeded UN range limits of 150 km with its ballistic missiles and is working with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which allow for a more lethal means to deliver biological and, less likely, chemical warfare agents.

* Although we assess that Saddam does not yet have nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make any, he remains intent on acquiring them. Most agencies assess that Baghdad started reconstituting its nuclear program about the time that UNSCOM inspectors departed--December 1998.

We assess that Baghdad has begun renewed production of mustard, sarin, GF (cyclosarin), and VX;its capability probably is more limited now than it was at the time of the Gulf war, although VX production and agent storage life probably have been improved.

* An array of clandestine reporting reveals that Baghdad has procured covertly the types and quantities of chemicals and equipment sufficient to allow limited CW agent production hidden within Iraq's legitimate chemical industry.

* Although we have little specific information on Iraq's CW stockpile, Saddam probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons (MT) and possibly as much as 500 MT of CW agents--much of it added in the last year.

* The Iraqis have experience in manufacturing CW bombs, artillery rockets, and projectiles. We assess that they possess CW bulk fills for SRBM warheads, including for a limited number of covertly stored Scuds, possibly a few with extended ranges.

We judge that all key aspects--R&D, production, and weaponization--of Iraq's offensive BW program are active and that most elements are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf war.

* We judge Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives.

o Chances are even that smallpox is part of Iraq's offensive BW program.

o Baghdad probably has developed genetically engineered BW agents.

* Baghdad has established a large-scale, redundant, and concealed BW agent production capability.

o Baghdad has mobile facilities for producing bacterial and toxin BW agents; these facilities can evade detection and are highly survivable. Within three to six months [Corrected per Errata sheet issued in October 2002] these units probably could produce an amount of agent equal to the total that Iraq produced in the years prior to the Gulf war.

This is just our NIE intell....

I believe the intell from Germany, France, Russia, England, Japan, etc. essentially agreed at this particular time....

I'll let you dig up the caveats and qualifiers....

 

[Alpha1]

I have no doubt that your troll behavior annoys more than just liberals.... but it has little to do with your politics, and much to do with your annoying, dishonest personality.

I have no doubt that your troll behavior will continue and you'll ignore most, if not all of the FACTS presented....you have little honesty or honor left....so your lies will most likely continue....

 

[maineman]

The following excerpts from an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate

http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html


Key Judgments [from October 2002 NIE]

Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction

We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these Key Judgments.)

We judge that we are seeing only a portion of Iraq's WMD efforts, owing to Baghdad's vigorous denial and deception efforts. Revelations after the Gulf war starkly demonstrate the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq to deny information. We lack specific information on many key aspects of Iraq's WMD programs.

Since inspections ended in 1998, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort, energized its missile program, and invested more heavily in biological weapons; in the view of most agencies, Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.

* Iraq's growing ability to sell oil illicitly increases Baghdad's capabilities to finance WMD programs; annual earnings in cash and goods have more than quadrupled, from $580 million in 1998 to about $3 billion this year.

* Iraq has largely rebuilt missile and biological weapons facilities damaged during Operation Desert Fox and has expanded its chemical and biological infrastructure under the cover of civilian production.

* Baghdad has exceeded UN range limits of 150 km with its ballistic missiles and is working with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which allow for a more lethal means to deliver biological and, less likely, chemical warfare agents.

* Although we assess that Saddam does not yet have nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make any, he remains intent on acquiring them. Most agencies assess that Baghdad started reconstituting its nuclear program about the time that UNSCOM inspectors departed--December 1998.

We assess that Baghdad has begun renewed production of mustard, sarin, GF (cyclosarin), and VX;its capability probably is more limited now than it was at the time of the Gulf war, although VX production and agent storage life probably have been improved.

* An array of clandestine reporting reveals that Baghdad has procured covertly the types and quantities of chemicals and equipment sufficient to allow limited CW agent production hidden within Iraq's legitimate chemical industry.

* Although we have little specific information on Iraq's CW stockpile, Saddam probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons (MT) and possibly as much as 500 MT of CW agents--much of it added in the last year.

* The Iraqis have experience in manufacturing CW bombs, artillery rockets, and projectiles. We assess that they possess CW bulk fills for SRBM warheads, including for a limited number of covertly stored Scuds, possibly a few with extended ranges.

We judge that all key aspects--R&D, production, and weaponization--of Iraq's offensive BW program are active and that most elements are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf war.

* We judge Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives.

o Chances are even that smallpox is part of Iraq's offensive BW program.

o Baghdad probably has developed genetically engineered BW agents.

* Baghdad has established a large-scale, redundant, and concealed BW agent production capability.

o Baghdad has mobile facilities for producing bacterial and toxin BW agents; these facilities can evade detection and are highly survivable. Within three to six months [Corrected per Errata sheet issued in October 2002] these units probably could produce an amount of agent equal to the total that Iraq produced in the years prior to the Gulf war.

This is just our NIE intell....

I believe the intell from Germany, France, Russia, England, Japan, etc. essentially agreed at this particular time....

I'll let you dig up the caveats and qualifiers....

as if six "probably"s aren't enough.

Here's a clue: "probably" and "absolute certainty" don't play well together!

and in any case, if you really think that Bush was operating off of "key judgments from the NIE" and not the actual intelligence reports themselves, you are even more stupid than I had originally thought!

 

[Alpha1]

as if six "probably"s aren't enough.

Here's a clue: "probably" and "absolute certainty" don't play well together!

and in any case, if you really think that Bush was operating off of "key judgments from the NIE" and not the actual intelligence reports themselves, you are even more stupid than I had originally thought!

You're quite a joke.....obviously never seen an intell report before.....
Key judgments is exactly what the Pres. operates from....do you think he gets the raw intell from all 16 agency's (probably thousands of pages) and just reads through them all. ? ....idiot....

NIEs are considered to be "estimative" products, in that they present what intelligence analysts estimate may be the course of future events. FUTURE EVENTS are by definition, best guesses....(estimates)
You do understand what the word ESTIMATE means don't you....
Can your little mind grasp that because the NIE's product IS an estimate of what the intell agencys gather that the word "probably" is quite common in the estimates

You're making a fool of yourself over this minor issue.....take my advice, go back under your rock and let this blow over...maybe you'll be lucky and people will forget it....

 

[maineman]

You're quite a joke.....obviously never seen an intell report before.....
Key judgments is exactly what the Pres. operates from....do you think he gets the raw intell from all 16 agency's (probably thousands of pages) and just reads through them all. ? ....idiot....

NIEs are considered to be "estimative" products, in that they present what intelligence analysts estimate may be the course of future events. FUTURE EVENTS are by definition, best guesses....(estimates)
You do understand what the word ESTIMATE means don't you....
Can your little mind grasp that because the NIE's product IS an estimate of what the intell agencys gather that the word "probably" is quite common in the estimates

You're making a fool of yourself over this minor issue.....take my advice, go back under your rock and let this blow over...maybe you'll be lucky and people will forget it....

and if the excerpt from the summary of the estimates contains six "probably"'s, that does not allow an honesty determination of "no doubt".
You and your butt buddy RGS are the only two who are disputing that obvious fact... maybe you ought to be the one finding that rock.

anbd here is my guess: I have seem more intelligence reports in any given six month span of my two decades of commissioned service than you have seen in your entire ******* life. wanna bet? As a matter of fact, I will bet that I saw more intelligence reports on one midwatch in an aircraft carrier CIC during a med deployment than you have ever seen, you ******* loser.

 

[trobinett]

and if the excerpt from the summary of the estimates contains six "probably"'s, that does not allow an honesty determination of "no doubt".
You and your butt buddy RGS are the only two who are disputing that obvious fact... maybe you ought to be the one finding that rock.

anbd here is my guess: I have seem more intelligence reports in any given six month span of my two decades of commissioned service than you have seen in your entire ******* life. wanna bet? As a matter of fact, I will bet that I saw more intelligence reports on one midwatch in an aircraft carrier CIC during a med deployment than you have ever seen, you ******* loser.

Damn if you don't have a way with words.........................

 

[Alpha1]

and if the excerpt from the summary of the estimates contains six "probably"'s, that does not allow an honesty determination of "no doubt".

You and your butt buddy RGS are the only two who are disputing that obvious fact... maybe you ought to be the one finding that rock.

You think because of the higher number of Bush haters on the site it makes your opinion correct....think again

anbd here is my guess: I have seem more intelligence reports in any given six month span of my two decades of commissioned service than you have seen in your entire ******* life. wanna bet? As a matter of fact, I will bet that I saw more intelligence reports on one midwatch in an aircraft carrier CIC during a med deployment than you have ever seen, you ******* loser.

If you've seen only one you would KNOW they are "best estimates" ,... interpretations of what our agencys see, hear, photograph, etc....so you should know better than to imply the intell briefs are super duper actual 'for sure' well known facts.... they are not, they are what we THINK at any given time ...especially when trying to determine what other nations are up to.....so don't talk stupid.....

If, after 16 of our nations intell agencys,having analyzed all the information they have, and they conclude (in their judgment)....

"We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions"

then putting our trust in them, that is what the rest of us mortals will take as the truth, as our best analysts can determine...and if we totally trust their "expert conclusions", the expert conclusion of our 16 different intell groups, combined, having made this judgment.......then depending on how firm your trust is, one can say, "their is no doubt, We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions etc.....
these judgments are even backed up other intell from other countrys worldwide and makes his belief even stronger....
If that is his firm belief, that is his firm belief....and Bush expressed it as such.....he speaks for himself....

 

[maineman]

If you've seen only one you would KNOW they are "best estimates" ,... interpretations of what our agencys see, hear, photograph, etc....so you should know better than to imply the intell briefs are super duper actual 'for sure' well known facts.... they are not, they are what we THINK at any given time ...especially when trying to determine what other nations are up to.....so don't talk stupid.....

If, after 16 of our nations intell agencys,having analyzed all the information they have, and they conclude (in their judgment)....

"We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions"

then putting our trust in them, that is what the rest of us mortals will take as the truth, as our best analysts can determine...and if we totally trust their "expert conclusions", the expert conclusion of our 16 different intell groups, combined, having made this judgment.......then depending on how firm your trust is, one can say, "their is no doubt, We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions etc.....

best estimates are not absolute certainty.

No one can honestly say "there is NO doubt" when some of their own advisors are expressing doubt.

 

[Alpha1]

If you were advised, "It would be better for you to do so and so".....

and you tell your wife "It would be best if I did so an so".....

are you now a liar.?...using your fucked up, convoluted, nit pickin' , childish logic, you would be a liar....

 

[Alpha1]

best estimates are not absolute certainty.

No one can honestly say "there is NO doubt" when some of their own advisors are expressing doubt.

They certainly can if they are expressing a personal belief.....and not trying to express the advisors beliefs

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I do not believe your ignorant rantings Maineman, the brief he provided does not GUESS or say Saddam May have WMD's it says HE has them. That he Retains the ability to make more. READ th highlighted parts retard. There are no probablies in those "estimates, they are difinative statements of what the Briefers believed.

The only POSSIBLE was Nucs and that was because they did not know when he would have them, not because they did not think he was trying.

You are so obsessed you can not even read plain english and want to play games by pretending some part of a brief that has NOTHING to do with another part implies doubt. There is NO DOUBT in that report.

 

[Alpha1]

probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.
its capability probably is more limited now than it was at the time of the Gulf war
storage life probably have been improved.
Saddam probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons (MT) and possibly as much as 500 MT of CW agents--much of it added in the last year.
Baghdad probably has developed genetically engineered BW agents
these units probably could produce an amount of agent equal to the total that Iraq produced in the years prior to the Gulf war.

I knew I should have looked at this before...

The six uses of the word "probably" in the NIE report that MM was so concerned about.....what crap.....
No where do these statements cast doubt on the belief that Saddam posessed WMD.....

MM lack of reading comp? Or just his dishonest spin at work ?

Either way...hes schooled again...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these Key Judgments.)

Go ahead parse the above and tell me they express doubt that Saddam Has Chemical and Biological weapons. Then tell me they express doubt he WANTS nuclear weapons.

We judge that we are seeing only a portion of Iraq's WMD efforts, owing to Baghdad's vigorous denial and deception efforts. Revelations after the Gulf war starkly demonstrate the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq to deny information. We lack specific information on many key aspects of Iraq's WMD programs

Go ahead and tell us how this implies any doubt or has a maybe in it. The doubt is that we do NOT know everything he has, not that he HAS WMD's as expressed in the previous paragraph.

Since inspections ended in 1998, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort, energized its missile program, and invested more heavily in biological weapons; in the view of most agencies, Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.

This one clearly states Iraq has Chemical weapons programs and that everyone believes he is also working on Nuclear weapons. Ohh and by the way, Bush never said Saddam HAD Nuclear weapons, just that he was working on getting them. Go ahead parse this for a maybe or some doubt.

* Iraq's growing ability to sell oil illicitly increases Baghdad's capabilities to finance WMD programs; annual earnings in cash and goods have more than quadrupled, from $580 million in 1998 to about $3 billion this year.

Another statement of fact, no doubt, no maybe. The brief clearly states Iraq has the money and will increasingly have MORE money to build WMD's, go ahead sho me the maybe or the doubt.

* Iraq has largely rebuilt missile and biological weapons facilities damaged during Operation Desert Fox and has expanded its chemical and biological infrastructure under the cover of civilian production.

Another STATEMENT of fact, show me where the maybe or we think is in this sentence.

* Baghdad has exceeded UN range limits of 150 km with its ballistic missiles and is working with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which allow for a more lethal means to deliver biological and, less likely, chemical warfare agents.

{/quote}

Ok where is the maybe or the we think here? The statement says the missiles can deliver biological weapons, which they earlier STATED were being made, but that not likely chemical.

* Although we assess that Saddam does not yet have nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make any, he remains intent on acquiring them. Most agencies assess that Baghdad started reconstituting its nuclear program about the time that UNSCOM inspectors departed--December 1998.

Look another STATEMENT. The only doubt is WHEN he will have them, not that he wants them or is working on them.

We assess that Baghdad has begun renewed production of mustard, sarin, GF (cyclosarin), and VX;its capability probably is more limited now than it was at the time of the Gulf war, although VX production and agent storage life probably have been improved.

Ohh look another STATEMENT. Go ahead parse this and give us the maybe or the we think part of it. The only cavet is that VX is more limited, not that it is not being made. And then they state that VX can last longer.

* An array of clandestine reporting reveals that Baghdad has procured covertly the types and quantities of chemicals and equipment sufficient to allow limited CW agent production hidden within Iraq's legitimate chemical industry.

Go ahead parse this one for us and tell us where the maybe is.

Although we have little specific information on Iraq's CW stockpile, Saddam probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons (MT) and possibly as much as 500 MT of CW agents--much of it added in the last year.

Ohh look finally a non definative statement, however the BEST estimate is pretty damn BIG.

* The Iraqis have experience in manufacturing CW bombs, artillery rockets, and projectiles. We assess that they possess CW bulk fills for SRBM warheads, including for a limited number of covertly stored Scuds, possibly a few with extended ranges.

ohh look another positive STATEMENT. The only time possible is used is in refrence to LONG range munitions, not in regards possession of weapons. Go ahead parse this one.

We judge that all key aspects--R&D, production, and weaponization--of Iraq's offensive BW program are active and that most elements are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf war.

And yet another clear STATEMENT, no maybe, no we think. The only caveat being that MOST elements of the program are LARGER and more advanced then before the war.

* We judge Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives.

Damn another definative STATEMENT. No maybe, no possibly. Go ahead explain this away.

o Chances are even that smallpox is part of Iraq's offensive BW program.

[/quote}

Ahh one of those maybes and then the prediction is even odds it is true. Which has nothing to do with previous statements of fact that WMD's exist and are being made by Saddam and that he is working on Nuclear weapons. So far all you have is the "maybe" about ONE type of WMD.

o Baghdad probably has developed genetically engineered BW agents.

Ahh another probably, which does not change the fact that the report has STATED repeatedly he has weapons, is producing more and is working on Nukes, none of THOSE statements are maybes, or shall I requote them for you?

* Baghdad has established a large-scale, redundant, and concealed BW agent production capability.

OHH no another STATEMENT of fact. No maybe, no we think. Go ahead explain this one also.

o Baghdad has mobile facilities for producing bacterial and toxin BW agents; these facilities can evade detection and are highly survivable. Within three to six months [Corrected per Errata sheet issued in October 2002] these units probably could produce an amount of agent equal to the total that Iraq produced in the years prior to the Gulf war.

Yes there is a probably in this Statement, but it is not about him HAVING the labs it is about how MUCH MORE agent he can produce with labs the intel is POSITIVE he has.



So much for all your maybes and possiblies and NO statements of fact.

You have not got a leg to stand on. THIS single report, one of many, is FULL of POSITIVE absolutes. Statements that convey no doubt, no caveat.

Your entire house of cards comes crashing down. This report alone negates EVERY one of your previous insistances that Bush could not have been positive because no one told him anything with out if's and or buts.

Here let me add the source for you....

http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html

 

[maineman]

are you saying there is NO doubt in any of that?

 

[Alpha1]

Go ahead mm....give the NIE report a shot....one issue at a time.....

 

[maineman]

Go ahead mm....give the NIE report a shot....one issue at a time.....

are you suggesting that the word probably and absolute certainty go together?