Bush Was Set on Path to War

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

I am amazed hwo you all can talk at length about politics, and somehow completely overlook this tidbit...

It's not asking the questions that's the important thing, it's asking the RIGHT questions...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/europe/27memo.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[Warham]

I'll need your log-in information to view the article...

[Terry]

Cheney and all the neo-cons considered Iraq unfinished business in the mid fucking 1990s. Wasn't astonishing to see us back in there after GW got selected in 2000.

What is more amazing than Bush wanting to go to war is how the pretext for invading Iraq was wrapped up with Bin Laden, terrorism and WMDs, and how W got a pass from the supposedly liberal media after none of those things proved to be true.

Nice to see the Fourth Estate totally fail in its' duty. Suppose they were too wrapped up with the Scott Peterson story or some equally worthless tabloid saga to get their priorities straight.

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

Originally posted by Warham
I'll need your log-in information to view the article...

here's the first bits of the article...

LONDON — In the weeks before the United States-led invasion of Iraq, as the United States and Britain pressed for a second United Nations resolution condemning Iraq, President Bush's public ultimatum to Saddam Hussein was blunt: Disarm or face war.

But behind closed doors, the president was certain that war was inevitable. During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons, said a confidential memo about the meeting written by Mr. Blair's top foreign policy adviser and reviewed by The New York Times.

"Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning," David Manning, Mr. Blair's chief foreign policy adviser at the time, wrote in the memo that summarized the discussion between Mr. Bush, Mr. Blair and six of their top aides.

"The start date for the military campaign was now penciled in for 10 March," Mr. Manning wrote, paraphrasing the president. "This was when the bombing would begin."

The timetable came at an important diplomatic moment. Five days after the Bush-Blair meeting, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was scheduled to appear before the United Nations to present the American evidence that Iraq posed a threat to world security by hiding unconventional weapons.

Although the United States and Britain aggressively sought a second United Nations resolution against Iraq — which they failed to obtain — the president said repeatedly that he did not believe he needed it for an invasion.

Stamped "extremely sensitive," the five-page memorandum, which was circulated among a handful of Mr. Blair's most senior aides, had not been made public. Several highlights were first published in January in the book "Lawless World," which was written by a British lawyer and international law professor, Philippe Sands. In early February, Channel 4 in London first broadcast several excerpts from the memo.

Since then, The New York Times has reviewed the five-page memo in its entirety. While the president's sentiments about invading Iraq were known at the time, the previously unreported material offers an unfiltered view of two leaders on the brink of war, yet supremely confident.

The memo indicates the two leaders envisioned a quick victory and a transition to a new Iraqi government that would be complicated, but manageable. Mr. Bush predicted that it was "unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups." Mr. Blair agreed with that assessment.

The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Mr. Hussein.

Those proposals were first reported last month in the British press, but the memo does not make clear whether they reflected Mr. Bush's extemporaneous suggestions, or were elements of the government's plan.

Consistent Remarks

Two senior British officials confirmed the authenticity of the memo, but declined to talk further about it, citing Britain's Official Secrets Act, which made it illegal to divulge classified information. But one of them said, "In all of this discussion during the run-up to the Iraq war, it is obvious that viewing a snapshot at a certain point in time gives only a partial view of the decision-making process."

On Sunday, Frederick Jones, the spokesman for the National Security Council, said the president's public comments were consistent with his private remarks made to Mr. Blair. "While the use of force was a last option, we recognized that it might be necessary and were planning accordingly," Mr. Jones said.

"The public record at the time, including numerous statements by the President, makes clear that the administration was continuing to pursue a diplomatic solution into 2003," he said. "Saddam Hussein was given every opportunity to comply, but he chose continued defiance, even after being given one final opportunity to comply or face serious consequences. Our public and private comments are fully consistent."

The January 2003 memo is the latest in a series of secret memos produced by top aides to Mr. Blair that summarize private discussions between the president and the prime minister. Another group of British memos, including the so-called Downing Street memo written in July 2002, showed that some senior British officials had been concerned that the United States was determined to invade Iraq, and that the "intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" by the Bush administration to fit its desire to go to war.

....there's more...

[blueturk]

Since we're using political cartoons now...

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
I'll need your log-in information to view the article...


http://www.bugmenot.com

[Warham]

That link doesn't work, FORD.

[Nickdfresh]

This is nothing new. Of course BUSH, CHENEY, ROVE, RUMSFELD, and others act as if they were going on the latest intelligence. But it is painfully clear to all but the most ardent sycophant partisans that these guys politicized, cherrypicked, and shaped the intelligence to suit their needs...

Knowing much of it was probably shit, and a big gamble at best...

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
That link doesn't work, FORD.

Works everytime I try it. Are you behind a corporate firewall where someone's created a filter of "bad" websites?

If so, I don't know why this one would be on it. Unless your admin really believes you should have to register to read a goddamned newspaper.

[DR CHIP]

Originally posted by FORD
http://www.bugmenot.com

Cool link FORD....thanks!

[FORD]

Originally posted by DR CHIP
Cool link FORD....thanks!

No problem. And if you use the Firefox browser, you can go here (http://roachfiend.com/archives/2005/02/07/bugmenot/) for an extension which incorporates the Bug Me Not functions into the browser's "Tools" column.

[Hardrock69]

And so despite all the above evidence, Chimpy tries to claim he never wanted war, and that Helen Thomas was a liar for even suggesting such a thing.

What a fucking dumbass.

[Warham]

Originally posted by FORD
Works everytime I try it. Are you behind a corporate firewall where someone's created a filter of "bad" websites?

If so, I don't know why this one would be on it. Unless your admin really believes you should have to register to read a goddamned newspaper.

No, I'm trying it from home. I don't use or have a computer at work. Don't need to.