Your opinion. You have no way of knowing that. Saddam was obstructive. Like I said, Bush et.al. believed they were there. In my opinion, they were there but got buried and/or shipped out while everyone fiddle-Fkd around trying to get authority to go in.
This is exactly right but everyone gets sucked into the media driven "Bush Lied" mantra and automatically assume it as truth when the facts state otherwise. All the Dems on the Senate Intelligence Committee have signed off on it but it gets conveniently ignored when discussing the issue. Everyone who thinks Bush lied, fabricated or influenced the intelligence evidence needs to read the reports.
This assumes you have proof that Bush knew there were no WMDs and concocted an elaborate scheme to deceive Congress and the public just so he could invade Iraq. Because there is proof to the contrary.
Not just my opinion, Paul Pillar, National intelligence officer for East and South Asia from 2000 to 2005 has stated that Bush and Cheney ignored substanial disagreement that existed in the intelligence community. Bottom line, you don't start a pre-emptive war on a half assed hunch. Iraq was never a threat to us. That's American lives your playing with, not toy soldiers. You do something like that, you'd damn well better be right, and W wasn't
Whats revisionist about the Senate Intelligence Committee reports that came out in 2004 and 2008? They are the most authoritative reports published to date. Not sure how that qualifies as being revisionist when its all there in black and white and both signed off on by Democrats on the committee. The Dems where looking for a smoking gun, you can bet that much, and they didnt find one.
And there is proof that he did and still pushed for the invasion. Dont sit here and act like the guy was totally innocent and was misled through out this. That is dishonest. There is plenty of proof of his knowledge after the report and he still pushed for the invasion.
