Subj : FAILURE
To   : Deuce
From : Frank Reid
Date : Mon Oct 03 2005 08:18 am

  Re: FAILURE
  By: Deuce to Frank Reid on Mon Oct 03 2005 00:06:00

 > I'm not even saying he fabricated the evidence (except for the yellowcake
 > thing, and HE didn't fabricate it) I'm saying he KNEW there was insufficient
 > evidence.  The CIA though it was possible but unlikely, the UN was fairly
 > certain they wern't there.  Everyone knew it was possible, but there was
 > absolutely no convincing evidence at any point.  About this, GWB *did* lie. 
 > said there was convincing evidence... he was one of the few who was convince
 > The people who COLLECED the evidence wern't convinced.

BTW, while it's fair to say there wasn't universal agreement on the
interpretation of the intelligence, it would be inaccurate to say there wasn't
compelling evidence indicating Iraq did have WMD and was actively working on
the apparatus to deliver that.  Just wanted to lay that as a baseline... to say
he "lied" about the evidence is inaccurate, although it may be accurate to say
he provided his evidence with a degree of certainty.  I guess I would expect
that, as opposed to "some people have interpreted this evidence differently,
but I think..."

So, lay out the geopolitical situation at the time.  Bush tried (feverishly,
without success) to get the UN to do their job after a decade of allowing
Saddam to thumb his nose at them.  Saddam himself was relishing in the
limelight of knowing his arch-enemy, America, thought he had WMD... and he was
obfuscating every attempt to ascertain differently.  The U.S. provided several
ultimatums for him to comply with UN sanctions and dispel that doubt, and he
again weaseled and tunneled and derailed every attempt to the best of his
ability.

Given what had just occurred to us eighteen months earlier, and on our home
soil, I think a reasonable leader would have acted pre-emptively.  Frankly, had
he not and the intelligence been accurate, Bush would have been criticized by
the world for *not* taking action.

I'll be honest... You're not going to convince me that the UN is anything other
than an impotent military force.  It's a great club, but it has too many
untrustworthy members with ulterior motives... And that doesn't even address
their ineffectiveness with military command and control or warfighting.  Until
they address those significant shortcomings, it would be folly for the U.S. to
think the UN could avert major conflict on its own.

---
 þ Synchronet þ BBS Doors (www.bbsdoors.com)

.