Quote:
Originally Posted by kgpoolerev
Your first website is post invasion intel, very interesting, but proves that the initial intel was in part incorrect. That is common knowledge now. Your other 2 sites would not load for me. Are they both post invasion information as well? Or maybe they provide intel on what Saddam planned with the 500 WMD he had?
|
All three are post-strike.
Quote:
|
For the first time you do not solely blame Bush, we are making progress. Now if you can only link me to the intel the president and Congress had pre-invasion.
|
For the first time???? You haven't read many of my posts have you? And I can not link you to the intel the president and Congress had pre-invasion...unless I want to go to jail.
Quote:
|
If you worked in intel then you definitely have more information than I have. Though if you worked in intel then you know that what you had was incomplete as well since you did not have the military, CIA, international, etc intel.
|
What do you mean?
Quote:
|
The casuality reports was high due to having to go in and I do believe included the belief that it was likely WMD would be used. The lack of use of WMD was the first sign of just how bad the intel was.
|
Like I said, I never saw any credible report predict 10K casualties.....with or without the WMD.
Quote:
|
If you do not know there was WMD found at the U.N. in New York City you certainly need to go to at least the second site.
|
I'll check it out.
Quote:
|
I love the way you try to deflect that there was WMD found by a report from 2004 that talks about the failure to find production facilities or the capabilities to produce new chemical or biological agents.
|
That's the thing, Ken....not only did not find any weapons....they didn't find the necessary industry and infrastructure to make them. That's why the are so definitive in their conclusions.
Quote:
|
I love the way you cannot prove nor disprove what Saddam's intentions were.
|
You would have to ask Saddam...But, it's logical to conclude, given his past actions, that he would've tried to reestablish his WMD programs if given the chance (assuming they could reacquire the capability)
Quote:
|
I do not know myself, but I like the unmitigated arrogance to proclaim that I KNOW.
|
1+1=2...I KNOW....
Quote:
|
You think and speculate just as I do. That is why I use 'if' and 'then'. Face it, you do NOT know. You do not know. It will be okay. Your pride will heal.
|
See Ken, I deal in the world of military force planning...what is the optimal force mix and CONOPs to achieve goals. My fairly well-informed opinion (along with many others) says that the invasion of Iraq was stupid, period....independent of whether or not Iraq had
real WMDs.
Quote:
|
It is fine to disagree. I do not like our soldiers being over there. I do not like it that my brother in law is going back. They are there and we need to pull together as a nation to support our troops so they can get the job done so we can get the hell out of there.
|
I can agree with that, Ken; however, we also need to learn from this experience...so we don't repeat our mistakes. There are still plenty of people on this forum who think the invasion of Iraq was a good idea....believe it or not.
Quote:
|
I do not want to do a half-assed job so that my nephews or nieces have to go back in 10 to 20 years.
|
Well, anytime you get in the business of shaping human behavior of people far different from us by the use of military force....you typically fail to achieve your primary goals. History is not on our side here....hope I'm wrong. I guess we'll see.
...based on my knowledge and accesses in this area.
Linear Mode
