According to the minutes of the meeting, Sir Richard Dearlove, then chief of Britain's intelligence service, said the White House viewed military action against Saddam Hussein as inevitable following the Sept. 11 attacks.
President Bush "wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD," read the memo, seen by the AP. "But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
HMMMMM, lying to congress is an impeachable offense isn't it? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] S'long George haha, I wish. From the memos
"Condi's enthusiasm for regime change is undimmed. But there were some signs, since we last spoke, of greater awareness of the practical difficulties and political risks. ... From what she said, Bush has yet to find the answers to the big questions: How to persuade international opinion that military action against Iraq is necessary and justified; What value to put on the exiled Iraqi opposition; How to coordinate a U.S./allied military campaign with internal opposition; (assuming there is any); What happens on the morning after?"? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]Good Ole Condi, no wonder they wanted to name a supertanker after her. [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]meeting yesterday showed that there is more work to do to ensure that the figures are accurate and consistent with those of the US. But even the best survey of Iraq's WMD programmes will not show much advance in recent years on the nuclear, missile or CW/BW (chemical or biological weapon) fronts: the programmes are extremely worrying but have not, as far as we know, been stepped up."?
"?"?"?"?
"US scrambling to establish a link between Iraq and Al Qaida is so far frankly unconvincing. To get public and Parliamentary support for military operations, we have to be convincing that the threat is so serious/imminent that it is worth sending out troops to die for; it is qualitatively different from the threat posed by other proliferators who are closer to achieving nuclear capability (including Iran)."? Would a "DADDY Grudge " be enough ?
"?"?"?"?
Bookmarks