"Hubris": New Documentary Reexamines the Iraq War "Hoax"

[Truthmatters]

why is it the intell people dont agree with you roo?

 

[Antares]

The problem here is that no matter what facts you personally are shown, your ONLY reaction is "nuh-uh".

I have quotes as far back as the mid 90's of the Left all agreeing that something had to be done because Saddam was on the verge of getting WMD.

As for all of the hindsight and spin that comes from the Left, spare me....everybody thought he had them.

why is it the intell people dont agree with you roo?

 

[boilermaker55]

So, we take it you are not interested in finding out why and who is responsible for the deaths of thousands of US Soldiers.
How despicable of you to be calloused.

Truly yesterdays news? The documentary doesn't air until tomorrow night.

The subject is truly old news just politically motivated clap trap by Maddow and MSDNC put out in a vain attempt to somehow distract people from the still near 8% unemployment, rapidly rising gas prices, and the sequester and budget battles coming in the next couple of weeks sorry.

 

[Dot Com]

I'll believe the war was a good idea when Iraq stops palling around w/ countries like Iran & Syria PLUS when Repubs pay for it.

 

[Truthmatters]

The problem here is that no matter what facts you personally are shown, your ONLY reaction is "nuh-uh".

I have quotes as far back as the mid 90's of the Left all agreeing that something had to be done because Saddam was on the verge of getting WMD.

As for all of the hindsight and spin that comes from the Left, spare me....everybody thought he had them.

why is it the intell people dont agree with you roo?

and then Bush LIED about the intell to take us to war.

your point?

 

[MarcATL]

By David Corn

An MSNBC film, hosted by Rachel Maddow and based on Michael Isikoff and David Corn's book, finds new evidence that Bush scammed the nation into war.

A decade ago, on March 19, 2003, President George W. Bush launched the invasion of Iraq that would lead to a nine-year war resulting in 4,486 dead American troops, 32,226 service members wounded, and over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians. The tab for the war topped $3 trillion. Bush did succeed in removing Saddam Hussein, but it turned out there were no weapons of mass destruction and no significant operational ties between Saddam's regime and Al Qaeda. That is, the two main assertions used by Bush and his crew to justify the war were not true. Three years after the war began, Michael Isikoff, then an investigative reporter for Newsweek (he's since moved to NBC News), and I published Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War, a behind-the-scenes account of how Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and their lieutenants deployed false claims, iffy intelligence, and unsupported hyperbole to win popular backing for the invasion.

Our book—hailed by the New York Times as "the most comprehensive account of the White House's political machinations"—was the first cut at an important topic: how a president had swindled the nation into war with a deliberate effort to hype the threat. The book is now the basis for an MSNBC documentary of the same name that marks the 10th anniversary of the Iraq war. Hosted by Rachel Maddow, the film premieres Monday night in her usual time slot (9PM ET/PT). But the documentary goes beyond what Isikoff and I covered in Hubris, presenting new scoops and showing that the complete story of the selling of that war has yet to be told.

One chilling moment in the film comes in an interview with retired General Anthony Zinni, a former commander in chief of US Central Command. In August 2002, the Bush-Cheney administration opened its propaganda campaign for war with a Cheney speech at the annual Veterans of Foreign Wars convention. The veep made a stark declaration: "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." No doubt, he proclaimed, Saddam was arming himself with WMD in preparation for attacking the United States.

Zinni was sitting on the stage during the speech, and in the documentary he recalls his reaction:

It was a shock. It was a total shock. I couldn't believe the vice president was saying this, you know? In doing work with the CIA on Iraq WMD, through all the briefings I heard at Langley, I never saw one piece of credible evidence that there was an ongoing program. And that's when I began to believe they're getting serious about this. They wanna go into Iraq.​

That Zinni quote should almost end the debate on whether the Bush-Cheney administration purposefully guided the nation into war with misinformation and disinformation.

Continued...

"Hubris": New Documentary Reexamines the Iraq War "Hoax" | Mother Jones

Wish I could rep you for this.

Yes, I'm well-aware of this documentary, all reports are that it was totally awesome...and timely.

However, I haven't seen it as yet, I did tape it, plan on watching it today or tonight.

The GOP is DESPERATELY trying to relititage the Iraq War and conduct their brand of revisionist history.

As recent as Nov. 2010 Bush told Matt Lauer or was it Brian Williams that even knowing what he knows now...he would still have done what he did. The bastard doesn't have any apologies.

I will never forget, nor forgive that man.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

.

I can't assume what a partisan is telling me is the whole story, no way. If I can't hear both sides of a story, there's no way I can make a final decision. That's just me.

You've got some "magic" way of listening to both sides....at once??

 

[Britfire54]

After 9/11, American patriotism was at fever pitch - and Bush used that to his advantage for his Iraq agenda.

Iraq WMD Lies: The Words of Mass Deception

Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq

What like Obama not letting a good crisis go to waste ? Is he Bushes clone as according to you and your thinking, or are you just one sided in your biased thinking ?

Try to focus. Obama didn't start the Iraq wars - the Bush boys did.

... nope. Try to focus. It was Saddam's intransigence, and belligerence, that was the point of origin for all that followed.

Are you trying to tell us that Saddam never defied UN Resolutions, these Resolutions designed to make him accountable for WMD stocks ? Did he never refuse to allow inspection teams the access they needed to do their jobs ?

And do you think it would've been at all reasonable for the US President to refuse to deal, in the wake of 9/11, with a rogue regime that was friendly with terrorists and which was going to great lengths to fail to cooperate with efforts made to scrutinise their WMD status ??

Bush launched the War on Terror, but he did so in reaction to terrorist attacks against the American mainland. What would you have had him do ... just sit passively on his hands, doing NOTHING to respond to terrorist attacks and threats ?!?

By the way, can you tell me why you keep citing so-called 'sources' of material from some evidently biased sites ? I absolutely include the Guardian newspaper in that description - for those who don't know, the British Guardian paper has a long history of pro-Socialist bias.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

.

I can't assume what a partisan is telling me is the whole story, no way. If I can't hear both sides of a story, there's no way I can make a final decision. That's just me.

.

It's pretty obvious to see what's going on when the government dismisses the conlcusions of their nuclear experts and goes with a story from an informant that the British and Italian intelligence agencies have both said the guy couldn't be trusted.

When the IAEA say's the uranium tubes were not the right kind for enriching uranium, how can anyone justify Cheney dismissing that finding, when he doesn't know squat about the technology?

How can George Bush say one of the reasons for going to war was because Hussein refused to allow UN inspectors in Iraq, when they were already there driving around in white vans.

September 08, 2002

Former weapons inspector:
Iraq Not A Threat!​

"Before his speech, Ritter said that the Bush administration was "using weapons inspections as an excuse" to go to war with Iraq.

"One of the problems with President Bush issuing that kind of ultimatum is that he has no credibility," Ritter said. "Members of his administration have said inspections don't matter.

"Members of his administration have said that, even if they get back in Iraq and succeed in disarming Iraq, that they're still going to seek regime removal."

 

[Mr. Shaman]

July 27, 2010

Hans Blix;
Iraq Inquiry Commission​

"Former United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix testified before the British Iraq Inquiry. He told the five-member panel that the invasion of Iraq was illegal and that the U.S. and Britain relied on poor intelligence sources leading up to the 2003 invasion. He said that inspectors failed to uncover any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that the U.S. was dismissive of opposing views."

HERE!!​

 

[BlindBoo]

Bush 41 could have easily avoided the FIRST U.S.-Iraq War.

Bush 43 could have easily avoided the SECOND U.S.-Iraq War.

And what, let the Kuwaiti's fend for themselves, and forget about them as our friends along with our oil interest in which they were our allies on?

As the WH pointed out at the time we had no mutual defense pact with Kuwait. Why didn't GWHB tell Saddam in no uncertain terms that we would defend Kuwait as if we did?

 

[Cammmpbell]

Lets clear up the whole Bush lied crap, Bush articulated what virtaully EVERY leading politician was saying from BOTH sides of the isle were saying.

Having said that, Iraq was a mistake.
WE had the Taliban on the ropes in Afghanistan AND we had Bin Laden stuck in Tora Bora and we elt them and him get out.

As for Bin Laden in the 80's, we did what we did to help Afghanistan take down the Soviets.
It worked but AS IS USUAL for our Nation we did not calculate the Cultural and Religious
differences of our Society, we have a VERY long history of no thinking past the length of our own dicks.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"....meaning we want hate these guys more than you, so we'll whip them and then deal with you later....and that is EXACTLY what happened.

roo tell us how the leadin to the Iraq war really wnet in your memory?

Let's ask him to watch this nice collection of their lies and tell us again about "Honest Abe" Bush:

 

[Lakhota]

Bush 41 could have easily avoided the FIRST U.S.-Iraq War.

Bush 43 could have easily avoided the SECOND U.S.-Iraq War.

And what, let the Kuwaiti's fend for themselves, and forget about them as our friends along with our oil interest in which they were our allies on?

As the WH pointed out at the time we had no mutual defense pact with Kuwait. Why didn't GWHB tell Saddam in no uncertain terms that we would defend Kuwait as if we did?

Instead, Bush 41 gave Saddam the "green light" to invade Kuwait - as per the Saddam/Ambassador Glaspie transcript.

 

[BlindBoo]

And what, let the Kuwaiti's fend for themselves, and forget about them as our friends along with our oil interest in which they were our allies on?

As the WH pointed out at the time we had no mutual defense pact with Kuwait. Why didn't GWHB tell Saddam in no uncertain terms that we would defend Kuwait as if we did?

Instead, Bush 41 gave Saddam the "green light" to invade Kuwait - as per the Saddam/Ambassador Glaspie transcript.

They were sending mixed messages for sure. The defense Sec stated on record that we had no defense pact with Kuwait, but they were making noise that a military option was not what we wanted. I'm sure Saddam saw this as the same game Ronnie played during the Iran war and chemical weapons against the Iranians and Kurds. Alot of talk with no action and Saddam continue to be on the favor Nations trading status.

 

[Antares]

I must apologize, I assumed that anyone who could read the post would also be able to understand it, well you know what they say about assumptions.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Now go and play with the other children kids.
You are dismissed.

Lets clear up the whole Bush lied crap, Bush articulated what virtaully EVERY leading politician was saying from BOTH sides of the isle were saying.

Having said that, Iraq was a mistake.
WE had the Taliban on the ropes in Afghanistan AND we had Bin Laden stuck in Tora Bora and we elt them and him get out.

As for Bin Laden in the 80's, we did what we did to help Afghanistan take down the Soviets.
It worked but AS IS USUAL for our Nation we did not calculate the Cultural and Religious
differences of our Society, we have a VERY long history of no thinking past the length of our own dicks.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"....meaning we want hate these guys more than you, so we'll whip them and then deal with you later....and that is EXACTLY what happened.

roo tell us how the leadin to the Iraq war really wnet in your memory?

Let's ask him to watch this nice collection of their lies and tell us again about "Honest Abe" Bush:

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Oddly, not one mention of these quotes:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998


"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

 

[Lakhota]

Faulty intelligence had many thinking Saddam had WMD - but the Bush boys had an agenda...OIL...

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Faulty intelligence had many thinking Saddam had WMD - but the Bush boys had an agenda...OIL...

Oh, I see. Now it isn't Bush lied, it's "faulty intelligence".

 

[Sallow]

I must apologize, I assumed that anyone who could read the post would also be able to understand it, well you know what they say about assumptions.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Now go and play with the other children kids.
You are dismissed.

Lets clear up the whole Bush lied crap, Bush articulated what virtaully EVERY leading politician was saying from BOTH sides of the isle were saying.

Having said that, Iraq was a mistake.
WE had the Taliban on the ropes in Afghanistan AND we had Bin Laden stuck in Tora Bora and we elt them and him get out.

As for Bin Laden in the 80's, we did what we did to help Afghanistan take down the Soviets.
It worked but AS IS USUAL for our Nation we did not calculate the Cultural and Religious
differences of our Society, we have a VERY long history of no thinking past the length of our own dicks.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"....meaning we want hate these guys more than you, so we'll whip them and then deal with you later....and that is EXACTLY what happened.

Let's ask him to watch this nice collection of their lies and tell us again about "Honest Abe" Bush:

Did any of those folks have the power the commander in chief does?

Wait, what? NO?

 

[beagle9]

Keep ignoring it, it will never go away Locohota...​

Democrats confirm Saddam Hussein has WMD.flv - YouTube

All of them caught on tape and you try to ignore it...​

I'm well aware that faulty intelligence led many to believe that Saddam had WMD - but it was the Bush boys who invaded Iraq TWICE - for no fucking logical reasons worth so much blood and treasure. Bush 41 suckered Saddam into invading Kuwait - and Bush 43 suckered the world with more deceit.

No, it's just that when the conservatives or those people with conservative values and/or influence, try to rescue and/or help other nations and their people in distress, the dems show up next not having the spine or the back bone to finish the job or even support it like it should be, so the situation ends up being a lost cause for all involved in the end, otherwise if they get their slimy hands all over it. Then look out because it all goes backwards after that it seems.

I think the politicians these days could mess up a two car funeral or better yet they couldn't pour water out of their shoe, even with the instructions written on the heel anymore.