Scott McClelland admits Bush administration lied on Iraq

[Andy]

For the record, the CIA, MI6 and Russian Intelligence all confirmed that Iraq had WMD's in the pre-war period. A huge intelligence failure, yes, a lie, how do you look past all these groups telling you this and ignore it?

Further, why are we still talking about this. The real issue is not how we got in Iraq, the issue is that we are there and we cannot leave. A pullout (as proposed by Obama) will destabilize the entire Middle East (which will further wreck the price of oil). This is the issue, not how we got there.

All true. But your dealing with Liberals. In lib-land, you bicker about the past, rewrite history to reflect your current assumptions, and use it to validate your candidate of choice, despite having no alternative plan or course of action. God himself could place proof in their laps, and with their head so stuck up their politics, they'll never see it, or admit if they do.

In the end, I don't think libs really care what happens to the Iraqis, provided they gain power in the government.

 

[Vietvet]

For the record, the CIA, MI6 and Russian Intelligence all confirmed that Iraq had WMD's in the pre-war period. A huge intelligence failure, yes, a lie, how do you look past all these groups telling you this and ignore it? Bush did what he had given the info he had. I for one am glad he has fortitude to at least stand with his decision unlike half the Senate who are trying to backtrack from their votes now.

Further, why are we still talking about this. The real issue is not how we got in Iraq, the issue is that we are there and we cannot leave. A pullout (as proposed by Obama) will destabilize the entire Middle East (which will further wreck the price of oil). This is the issue, not how we got there.

OK, I'm open to suggestions...What do YOU suggest we do? Stay ther indefintely, wasting American blood and treasure, refereeing a conflict that has come about because of our own idiotic invasion, which too many Americans so blindly supported?

I think we need to re-engage the international community. Maybe utilize an international peacekeeping force of some kind, using NATO, the UN, or both.Bush obviously can't do that, because he's managed to effectively squander all the worldwide good will that came our way immediately following 9/11/01. It will take new leadership,diplomacy, and international pressure on countries like Iran and Syria. This means, yes, actually TALKING to them!

It doesn't mean appeasing them, either. It means applying pressure, through the international community as well as unilaterally, on Iran to start playing by the rules and stop with their nuke "ambitions." The Iranian people are actually pro-western, unlike their leader, who is also, btw, only a symbolic figure. The real power is with the Ayatollah, which is another basic fact that is always lost, somehow.Sabre rattling is stupid and ineffective. If it had not been for our so idiotically invading Iraq, the Shiites would not be in power in Iraq now, and Iran would not have the influence there that it now does. And what about "Al Qeada?" I heard Michael Ware say yesterday that Al Qeada represents less than 2% of the so-called "insurgency." So much for the war being about "fighting Al Qeada.."

The intelligence presented to the UN was obviously cooked, and Bushco knew it was bs, so, I say we have every right to keep the argument alive as to the way we were misled to war in Iraq in the first place. I'm not about to give bush a free pass on it, I don't give a **** what ANYBODY says.

 

[Vietvet]

All true. But your dealing with Liberals. In lib-land, you bicker about the past, rewrite history to reflect your current assumptions, and use it to validate your candidate of choice, despite having no alternative plan or course of action. God himself could place proof in their laps, and with their head so stuck up their politics, they'll never see it, or admit if they do.

In the end, I don't think libs really care what happens to the Iraqis, provided they gain power in the government.

So, I take it that you believe that history will show that Bush made the correct decision by invading Iraq? Talk about "rewriting history.." Why EXACTLTY did we invade, again?Please, refresh the memory of an old "Liberal."

All you on the right have is the repetitive use of the term, "liberal", as if that in itself will win a debate. It won't.I LIKE the term "liberal", fyi.. So, what are YOUR 'solutions," or are you just blowing smoke, which seems to be the modus operandi of the right..

I'm sure Bush really cares what happens to the Iraqis, that's why thousands and thousands of them have been killed-because of his profound grasp of international matters of war and peace..Give me a break.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

All true. But your dealing with Liberals. In lib-land, you bicker about the past, rewrite history to reflect your current assumptions, and use it to validate your candidate of choice, despite having no alternative plan or course of action. God himself could place proof in their laps, and with their head so stuck up their politics, they'll never see it, or admit if they do.

In the end, I don't think libs really care what happens to the Iraqis, provided they gain power in the government.

actuly no the CIA did not in fact Say there was for sure WMD, in fact there where many reports that said in fact there was reason to suspect the intel was wrong or not accurate.

The Yellow Cake for one, was known to the CIA ,State Department ( and even me) to be false at the state of the Union. It was told to the white house many times not to use this, Dick Cheney actually received a report on this claim before the statement was made as he had asked about the Report before Wilson was sent to investigate.

There where CIA/State Department reports on the Tubes, Bush cherry picked what he wanted. The reports said it was not likely they could be used for Nuclear means, only for missiles ( that they legally had)

The CIA had Saddam's Son in Law who had Defected saying the program had been suspended and destroyed in 1998 out of fear of the Inspectors . He Was dumb and returned to Iraq when Saddam said he would let him back...he was then executed.

This was not Doubts hidden in top Secret Documents...this was stuff known to anyone who really looked at the time.

As someone who had believed he had WMD...The More Bush made his Case, the less I believe it was true.

Many in the CIA have also come out to say that it was made clear buy the white House ( Dick) that he was not going to take reports that did not fit what they wanted to hear, and the intel was all cherry picked.

 

[top gun]

Thanks for a well thought out and topically relevant post, top Gun. very refreshing. To answer your reference to my screen name first, yes, I'm a Vietnam vet, and have seen the results of war up close and personal, having served as a medic. I'm probably one of the most anti-war mfckers you'll ever meet. I'm also a strong advocate for vets of all wars, and "chickenhawks"disgust me. I believe war should ALWAYS be a last resort,only if all else fails.I appreciate your thanks, buddy.

I'm watching "Hardball" as I'm typing this, and Matthews just finished raking Ari Fleitcher over the coals for repeating WH talking points..I think it's going to be tough for McCain to sell the war after this, as if it's not already hard enough for him. I don't know about you, but I ALWAYS thought Bushco lied about intelligence reports and "cooked the books" because they were dead-set on getting rid of Saddam, one way or the other. It seemed pretty obvious to many of us, even way back then. I'm not claiming to be some kind of genius or anything, but I STILL can't understand how so many people were conned into buying what they were selling. This book should help to remove all doubt, except for the 20% or so who would believe that the earth is flat if Bush/Cheney told them so..

I don't think this book, in and of itself, will be enough to bring the Republicans down any further, because they are already down, but added to everything else that's been happening, with the economy drifting into recession, the war dragging on with no end in sight, people struggling to make ends meet, and Bush at the lowest approval rating ever, it could well be enough to seal Obama's election, and bring our Senate majority to 60-40 or so. So much for the better,imho..

November can't get here soon enough, for me.

Funny you mentioned HARDBALL... great minds must think alike.
I just mentioned watching it as I posted in my last response.

Wow a Medic... that's not only being brave but very Technically Qualified all at the same time. Unfortunately you must have really seen the worst. I don't know exactly what to say... thanks doesn't really cover it and I'm sure those kind of memories have to take a toll. Fortunately from reading your posts I can tell you handled it and have no problem asserting yourself.

I graduated high school in 75 so the draft had just ended. You can imagine though those of us my age at the time were watching everything INTENTLY and had a lot of just slightly older friends & family that were drafted in.

I agree with you that the Republicans are already at a pretty low point but I still have a feeling this is the absolute worst thing that could happen to John McSame. He's on board with Bush policy including the war... now we know a lot more about Bush policy & the war. All bad for McSame!

 

[Vietvet]

Funny you mentioned HARDBALL... great minds must think alike.
I just mentioned watching it as I posted in my last response.

Wow a Medic... that's not only being brave but very Technically Qualified all at the same time. Unfortunately you must have really seen the worst. I don't know exactly what to say... thanks doesn't really cover it and I'm sure those kind of memories have to take a toll. Fortunately from reading your posts I can tell you handled it and have no problem asserting yourself.

I graduated high school in 75 so the draft had just ended. You can imagine though those of us my age at the time were watching everything INTENTLY and had a lot of just slightly older friends & family that were drafted in.

I agree with you that the Republicans are already at a pretty low point but I still have a feeling this is the absolute worst thing that could happen to John McSame. He's on board with Bush policy including the war... now we know a lot more about Bush policy & the war. All bad for McSame!

I actually hope McClellan's book has legs, because we must NEVER make this kind of ignorant mistake of putting our troops needlessly into harm's way, imo..If the book shines the spotlight on Bushco more brightly, it will be a positive development.

If you graduated in '75, then you're old enough to remember a lot of what was going on back then, which gives some of us older people a sense of history, and that making the same mistakes over and over again regarding matters of war and peace will inevitably lead to similar results.Watching human beings suffer needlessly because of the decisions of clueless leaders is an eye-opening experience, to say the least. That's what frustrates me about these flag-waving "chicken-hawks". They don't have a clue what war really IS, and never will. Yet, they're practically giddy whenever the possibility of a NEW war comes up. They are always for going to war-as long as THEY don't have to go, of course..Not only Bush/Cheney, but all the "LITTLE BITTY" chicken-hawks who have been holding them up as 'heroes." They truly do make me sick.

But I'm no hero, just someone who joined the military to get out of my small town and "learn a trade." My family was not wealthy, and I couldn't afford to go to college, so the military was a "way out." I had no clue what was waiting for me. Just like the young people who are joining up today."Thanks", is fine, nothing more required. But I DO appreciate your appreciation, so to speak...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

But I'm no hero, just someone who joined the military to get out of my small town and "learn a trade." My family was not wealthy, and I couldn't afford to go to college, so the military was a "way out." I had no clue what was waiting for me. Just like the young people who are joining up today."Thanks", is fine, nothing more required. But I DO appreciate your appreciation, so to speak...

Sounds like what a true hero would say.

 

[top gun]

I actually hope McClellan's book has legs, because we must NEVER make this kind of ignorant mistake of putting our troops needlessly into harm's way, imo..If the book shines the spotlight on Bushco more brightly, it will be a positive development.

If you graduated in '75, then you're old enough to remember a lot of what was going on back then, which gives some of us older people a sense of history, and that making the same mistakes over and over again regarding matters of war and peace will inevitably lead to similar results.Watching human beings suffer needlessly because of the decisions of clueless leaders is an eye-opening experience, to say the least. That's what frustrates me about these flag-waving "chicken-hawks". They don't have a clue what war really IS, and never will. Yet, they're practically giddy whenever the possibility of a NEW war comes up. They are always for going to war-as long as THEY don't have to go, of course..Not only Bush/Cheney, but all the "LITTLE BITTY" chicken-hawks who have been holding them up as 'heroes." They truly do make me sick.

But I'm no hero, just someone who joined the military to get out of my small town and "learn a trade." My family was not wealthy, and I couldn't afford to go to college, so the military was a "way out." I had no clue what was waiting for me. Just like the young people who are joining up today."Thanks", is fine, nothing more required. But I DO appreciate your appreciation, so to speak...

You know the thing I always find is the real heroes are almost always very understated.

You've probably heard the old saying... When the devil comes he'll be wrapped in the flag waving a Bible. You see a lot of that going on these days in my opinion.

My best friend's son Scott is over in Iraq right now (4th tour) 1 in Kuwait 3 in Iraq. He's a Army Ranger Staff Sargent stationed out of Fort Campbell. He's doing the careerer thing been in either 16 or 18 years I can't remember.

He got in for the exact same reasons you did. His Dad (my best friend) was a Marine got out and got into the Masonry Trade. Scott didn't really want to do brick & block so he joined the Army. He then ended up marrying a retired Colonel's daughter and the rest is history. They have 2 little girls. Let's just all hope he gets through this thing OK and gets to see them grow up.

They say the more tours the less chances. I don't like that a bit! Let's hope Mclelland's book on the Bush lie machine helps speed up a safe return for the guys!

 

[SW85]

You just stumbled upon the truth. It is because, the books are simply lies/distortions/smears, to get money and attention.

You'd think if this were the case they'd come up with something a little better than the tired old "Bush lied/people died" business.

But then again, as Ramesh Ponnuru observed, PR never was McClellan's strong suit.

 

[Vietvet]

You know the thing I always find is the real heroes are almost always very understated.

You've probably heard the old saying... When the devil comes he'll be wrapped in the flag waving a Bible. You see a lot of that going on these days in my opinion.

My best friend's son Scott is over in Iraq right now (4th tour) 1 in Kuwait 3 in Iraq. He's a Army Ranger Staff Sargent stationed out of Fort Campbell. He's doing the careerer thing been in either 16 or 18 years I can't remember.

He got in for the exact same reasons you did. His Dad (my best friend) was a Marine got out and got into the Masonry Trade. Scott didn't really want to do brick & block so he joined the Army. He then ended up marrying a retired Colonel's daughter and the rest is history. They have 2 little girls. Let's just all hope he gets through this thing OK and gets to see them grow up.

They say the more tours the less chances. I don't like that a bit! Let's hope Mclelland's book on the Bush lie machine helps speed up a safe return for the guys!

That's exactly what makes the "all volunteer"military we have now such a travesty, imo...I'm on the opposite side of this particular issue from most Dems, and you may or may not agree with me here, which is OK either way. But I just think it is unfair for a person in the military to be expected to serve tour after tour after tour of duty in a combat zone. It's hard on families, it wrecks the soldiers either physically, mentally, or both, and it's totally beyond what anyone should be expected to do. A soldier was only sent to Vietnam once per two or three year enlistment when the draft was in place.Twelve months and that was it. A lot of guys got drafted, stayed for a couple of years, and got out. Some chose to stay, and every time they re-enlisted, they risked being sent back to Vietnam, but many of them drew other assignments, either stateside or in places like Germany or England. They weren't expected to be human combat machines, that you wind up again and again-and again.


At some point, with our military stretched so thin ,and endless perpetual war constantly on the horizon, recruiters won't be able to offer enough $$ to recruit and retain enough personell, for ANY amount of money or benefits. That time is approaching, and I believe that the draft will be something pols will have to seriously consider reinstating, like it or not.It should be fair, and legitimate exemptions, such as disability, parenthood, and certain other factors should exclude some from being drafted. Being the son of an influential citizen or politician should not.

 

[Here We Go]

I don't care if the Middle East shuts our oil off. We will think of someway to get through this. I would gladly suffer through the d**ned inconvenience if we didn't have anything more to do with those psychos. We have enough problems dealing with the corruption in the White House. Hopefully, the American citizens will band together and march in every major city demanding our country back. May God Bless America!!

​

 

[Libsmasher]

Rebuttal of WHAT? You haven't SAID anything that makes any sense, or is of any import. I haven't seen any evidence so far that you are capable of doing so. All you do is spout nonsense. What's to rebut? Not much, that I can see.. If there was, I'd be among the first to do so.

Are you the 'village idiot' around here? That's how it's starting to look.

Did you get a head wound in vietnam? Is that why nonsense is drooling out of you? Heard about all you guys doing more weed than fighting over there. And did you REALLY go? You're too gutless to debate anything - all you have is different versions of the same BS post, above. Chicken chicken chicken.

 

[Libsmasher]

OK, I'm open to suggestions...What do YOU suggest we do? Stay ther indefintely, wasting American blood and treasure, refereeing a conflict that has come about because of our own idiotic invasion, which too many Americans so blindly supported?

Yaaaaa einstein it would have been MUCH BETTER to leave Saddam there to attack other mideast countries, eventually get nukes for sure if he didn't have them already and IRBMS, continue to destroy millions of people and disrupt the most strategic area of the world - any FOOL can see that - in fact ONLY fools can see it.

I think we need to re-engage the international community.

"Re-engage"?? What does that mean? It doesn't mean anything - it's one of these gauzy feel-good Obamidiocies that you bots toss around - it's not policy.

Maybe utilize an international peacekeeping force of some kind, using NATO, the UN, or both.

To do WHAT? The UN has never kept the peace anywhere - the last time the UN was in iraq, some islamofascists bombed their headquarters. You don't have the slightest CLUE what you're talking about.

Bush obviously can't do that, because he's managed to effectively squander all the worldwide good will that came our way immediately following 9/11/01.

What good did "worldwide good will" do us? NOTHING. You sound like a ten year old - other nations will continue to do what they've always done - act in their own self interest. This "good will" crap and is a naive appeaser hallucination.

It will take new leadership,diplomacy, and international pressure on countries like Iran and Syria. This means, yes, actually TALKING to them!

And say WHAT? Y'all always say this "talking to them" crap, but you never say what is to be said. You don't because there's nothing to talk about. This is another Obama cliche appeasers have picked up and dumbly repeat, and it doesn't mean anything.

It doesn't mean appeasing them, either. It means applying pressure, through the international community as well as unilaterally, on Iran to start playing by the rules and stop with their nuke "ambitions."

They already tried that - do they have NEWS where you are? They tried it with Saddam prewar and it got NOWHERE. The euroweenies have tried it for three years with Iran and got NOWHERE. This "talking to them" crap can only be uttered by some completely BLANK about recent history.

 

[Bunz]

Yaaaaa einstein it would have been MUCH BETTER to leave Saddam there to attack other mideast countries, eventually get nukes for sure if he didn't have them already and IRBMS, continue to destroy millions of people and disrupt the most strategic area of the world - any FOOL can see that - in fact ONLY fools can see it.

He wasnt going to attack anyone. Especially with WMDs. He was warned back in 90 that a WMD attack would result in a nuke attack against Tikrit. This is not a secret. But if he had WMDs, why didnt he use them as Americans crossed the border either time? Or how about on the outskirts of Baghdad? Continue to drink the red kool-aid. MMMMM

"Re-engage"?? What does that mean? It doesn't mean anything - it's one of these gauzy feel-good Obamidiocies that you bots toss around - it's not policy.

I guess I thought you were more intelligent that you appear here. But re-enagage as in foster our international relations through less strong arm tactics, heeding advice given by our allies when they obviously know more about certain things. Treating foreign nationals in a way we expect Americans be treated etc.

What good did "worldwide good will" do us? NOTHING. You sound like a ten year old - other nations will continue to do what they've always done - act in their own self interest. This "good will" crap and is a naive appeaser hallucination.

It gave us widespread for support in Afghanistan. Which we squandered in our chase for non-existent WMDs in Iraq.

And say WHAT? Y'all always say this "talking to them" crap, but you never say what is to be said. You don't because there's nothing to talk about. This is another Obama cliche appeasers have picked up and dumbly repeat, and it doesn't mean anything.

Yeah your right, its not like the Bush Administration talked to NKorea, Libya, or the Palestinians, its not like they didnt do squat about 15 Saudis killing 3000 Americans, and we removed our troops when asked to do so after they our good friends the Saudis said no help for Iraq.

They already tried that - do they have NEWS where you are? They tried it with Saddam prewar and it got NOWHERE. The euroweenies have tried it for three years with Iran and got NOWHERE. This "talking to them" crap can only be uttered by some completely BLANK about recent history.

So lets just bomb every country who has a disagreement with us?

 

[Vietvet]

Yaaaaa einstein it would have been MUCH BETTER to leave Saddam there to attack other mideast countries, eventually get nukes for sure if he didn't have them already and IRBMS, continue to destroy millions of people and disrupt the most strategic area of the world - any FOOL can see that - in fact ONLY fools can see it.



"Re-engage"?? What does that mean? It doesn't mean anything - it's one of these gauzy feel-good Obamidiocies that you bots toss around - it's not policy.



To do WHAT? The UN has never kept the peace anywhere - the last time the UN was in iraq, some islamofascists bombed their headquarters. You don't have the slightest CLUE what you're talking about.



What good did "worldwide good will" do us? NOTHING. You sound like a ten year old - other nations will continue to do what they've always done - act in their own self interest. This "good will" crap and is a naive appeaser hallucination.



And say WHAT? Y'all always say this "talking to them" crap, but you never say what is to be said. You don't because there's nothing to talk about. This is another Obama cliche appeasers have picked up and dumbly repeat, and it doesn't mean anything.



They already tried that - do they have NEWS where you are? They tried it with Saddam prewar and it got NOWHERE. The euroweenies have tried it for three years with Iran and got NOWHERE. This "talking to them" crap can only be uttered by some completely BLANK about recent history.

Saddam didn't have nukes, and wasn't going to GET nukes. it was a LIE. Are you so braindead that you haven't yet figured that out? It would be good if you could refrain from your childish personal attacks and stick to the issues, but since you seem incapable of doing that, I have no problem responding in kind.

You were lied to by Bushco, all the evidence points to it, yet your head has been filled with so much bs from the RW, that you are totally without a clue.Now, try paying attention. Focus, I know you've got ADD..Saddam Hussein was not a threat to us, or his neighbors. he was boxed in effectively, and was actually a counterbalance to Iran. By invading so stupidly and deposing him, what have we accomplished? We've gotten a Shiite government elected, which in turn has gotten into bed with Iran, which in turn is becoming a larger threat to us than it ever was in the past. Are you following me so far?

I didn't think so. Let's see if you can digest that much, before we try to tackle the subject of international diplomacy, something you obviously are totally in the dark about.I'll give you a clue, there is strength in numbers, that's what i mean by engaging the international community. George HW bush understood that, so did Clinton. So has every other POTUS,including Nixon and Reagan, until the junior cowboy wannabe came along. You have displayed a glaring ignorance here that is nothing short of amazing. And you don't even know it. Incredible. ignorance must indeed be bliss. is it? I'm sure you don't know what the hell I'm talking about, do you?

Did your mommy ever teach you any respect for veterans of the US military, SONNY?I think your daddy should have taken you to the "woodshed" a long time ago. you sound like a spoiled brat. Is that why you like Bush? He's one too, you know..Did you vote for him because you'd like to "have a beer" with him? Probably so. You obviously have no depth and you don't know wtf you're talking about. You can only parrot RW talking points, and you even do a piss-poor job of that.

Don't you have a video "war game" to play or something? You should leave political discussions to those of us who know how to discuss without using playground tactics suited for kindergartners.I mean, we all know you don't have the courage to really go to war, because it's easier to sit behind a computer screen and bash those of us who have. So, why is it that you haven't signed up for duty, again? Are you just a coward who likes to wave the flag and throw rocks at a distance, or were you too stupid to pass the written test?Probably both.

Inquiring minds want to know...