In wake of WMD report, Bush struggles to convince public he was right to go to war
Julian Borger in Washington
Saturday October 4, 2003
The Guardian
Facing national headlines pointing out the conspicuous absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and plunging public approval in opinion polls, a defensive President George Bush continued to insist yesterday that he had been right to go to war against Saddam Hussein.
The White House was reported to be angered by the US media interpretation of the CIA-led Iraq Survey Group (ISG) report on the search for banned weapons.
Almost every major newspaper led its front page with the failure to find actual weapons. Talking to reporters at a special press conference to address the issue, Mr Bush pointed to the evidence in the ISG report of proof of Saddam's intentions to pursue weapons programmes. It showed that the Iraqi dictator had actively deceived the UN and had been "a danger to the world" at the time of the March invasion, the president said.
"The report states that Saddam Hussein's regime had a clandestine network of biological laboratories, a live strain of deadly agent botulinum, sophisticated concealment efforts, and advanced design work on prohibited longer-range missiles," he said.
In his report to Congress, the head of the ISG, David Kay, said there was no evidence that Iraq had reconstituted its chemical and nuclear weapon programmes.
The only potential biological weapon the ISG had found, he reported, was a single vial of botulinum toxin, which is also used in cosmetic surgery.
The failure to find weapons, combined with the continued bloodshed in Iraq, appear to have contributed to the president's sliding standing in the opinion polls.
A New York Times/CBS News survey published yesterday found that 56% of Americans disapproved of his handling of the economy, against 37% who approved.
Furthermore, only 45% of those asked said they had confidence in Mr Bush's ability to deal wisely with international crises.
"Sometimes the American people like the decisions I make, sometimes they don't," the president said. "But they need to know I'll make tough decisions based upon what I think is right."
The administration could at least point to some good economic news, with figures showing that the economy had produced jobs for the first time since January.
But the Kay report, together with the continuing FBI investigation into an administration leak illegally identifying a CIA undercover agent, continued to erode the president's ability to fend off his critics.
The Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, emerged yesterday from a closed-door meeting with Mr Kay saying it was clear "there was no imminence of a threat for weapons of mass destruction".
Spin it Shrub, spin it- someone tell me now he doesn't do a perfect impression of a moron.
And just because it made me laugh my arse off:
Bill Maher's Blog wrote:David Kay, the guy who's been looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq for the past four months, has turned in his "interim" report. In a nutshell, he's found nothing. They've found no trace of chemical weapons, nuclear material, or biological weapons - unless you count those pine-tree air fresheners that taxi drivers use. President Bush said he still believes, as he's maintained all along, that Saddam had an active program to begin thinking about a scenario whereby at some point in the future he might establish a program with the ultimate goal of building weapons of mass destruction.
First it was "Saddam has WMD."
Then it was "Saddam has active WMD programs that are very close to developing WMD."
Then it became "Saddam has WMD programs that will produce viable weapons in the mid-term future."
And now it's "Saddam was thinking nasty thoughts about me that involved the letters "W M D".
*sigh*
"Carriers dispense fighters, which dispense assbeatings." - White Haven
| Hyperactive Gundam Pilot of MM | GALE | ASVS | Cleaners | Kibologist (beable) | DFB |
If only one rock and roll song echoes into tomorrow
There won't be anything to keep you from the distant morning glow.
I'm not a man. I just portrayed one for 15 years.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"
- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist
"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
"Carriers dispense fighters, which dispense assbeatings." - White Haven
| Hyperactive Gundam Pilot of MM | GALE | ASVS | Cleaners | Kibologist (beable) | DFB |
If only one rock and roll song echoes into tomorrow
There won't be anything to keep you from the distant morning glow.
I'm not a man. I just portrayed one for 15 years.
BUSH: "Thanks for giving me a re-election issue, SUCKERS! Hope ya like me, 'cause now you're gonna see four more years o' me."
"Carriers dispense fighters, which dispense assbeatings." - White Haven
| Hyperactive Gundam Pilot of MM | GALE | ASVS | Cleaners | Kibologist (beable) | DFB |
If only one rock and roll song echoes into tomorrow
There won't be anything to keep you from the distant morning glow.
I'm not a man. I just portrayed one for 15 years.
Simon H.Johansen wrote:Why did Bush have to use the weapons of mass destruction as an argument?? Didn't he have plenty of other reasons to invade Iraq?
(although many of these reasons I have in mind might be morally justified but not legally justified)
Because he wanted other nations on board. And you can't invade nations based on morals only, otherwise there'd be an invasaion every second week.
The talk of WMDs was to scare the shit out of the American public primarily. Look at his speeches- mushroom clouds, poisons capable of killing millions, and all sorts of other kinds of alarmist bullshit.
Admiral Valdemar wrote:Iraq couldn't threaten a wounded camel, letalone a superpower.
Well, that's only because the funk coming off a camel is a WMD itself and dropped the Iraqis trying to get it at five feet with it's spit. Now a wounded gopher... they are a threat to those! We must protect the wounded gophers from the WMDs!
"Show me an angel and I will paint you one." - Gustav Courbet
"Quetzalcoatl, plumed serpent of the Aztecs... you are a pussy." - Stephen Colbert
"Really, I'm jealous of how much smarter than me he is. I'm not an expert on anything and he's an expert on things he knows nothing about." - Me, concerning a bullshitter
Simon H.Johansen wrote:Why did Bush have to use the weapons of mass destruction as an argument?? Didn't he have plenty of other reasons to invade Iraq?
(although many of these reasons I have in mind might be morally justified but not legally justified)
Because he wanted other nations on board. And you can't invade nations based on morals only, otherwise there'd be an invasaion every second week.
I'm already getting a bit of amnesia on this subject... what reasons for invading did Bush provide other than the terror connections and the whole mass destruction thing?
"Hi there, would you like to have a cookie?"
"No, actually I would HATE to have a cookie, you vapid waste of inedible flesh!"
If we know there aren't any WMDs, why can't he just admit it, perhaps say it was "faulty inteligence" or something? I'm sure it would alienate fewer people in the long run than making increasingly weak accusations that could easily be used against him.
Iraq couldn't threaten a wounded camel, letalone a superpower.
What about the superpower's allies in the region? Or do you think we should just ignore all our mutual-defense treaties?
What of it? Saudi Arabia still has (AFAIK) more Abrams tanks than the US military. Iraq wouldn't be stupid enough to attack Kuwait again...Hussein is many things; an idiot is not one of them. Jordan has very difficult terrain to invade, and any invasion would be slow enough that even the lethargic titan of the US military could most likely deploy there in order to prevent its investiture by Iraq. Syria's not an ally. Iran's not an ally. Turkey would kick Iraq's ass, since 2/3 of the Turkish military is near the Turkey/Iraq border. And we've now covered every neighbor of Iraq. Iraq was only possibly a threat to Kuwait, and that's not even a very credible threat.
Stanley Hauerwas wrote:[W]hy is it that no one is angry at the inequality of income in this country? I mean, the inequality of income is unbelievable. Unbelievable. Why isn’t that ever an issue of politics? Because you don’t live in a democracy. You live in a plutocracy. Money rules.
Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi wrote:If we know there aren't any WMDs, why can't he just admit it, perhaps say it was "faulty inteligence" or something? I'm sure it would alienate fewer people in the long run than making increasingly weak accusations that could easily be used against him.
Because that would bring up the question of whether or not Bush was wagging the dog and pressuring the CIA into giving him only intel that supported his preconceived notions, no matter how spotty that intel was. Since there are plenty of rumblings about this already, I certainly wouldn't be surprised to learn that the Bush administration willfully used shitty intelligence to knowingly dupe the populace into supporting the war.
Damien Sorresso
"Ever see what them computa bitchez do to numbas? It ain't natural. Numbas ain't supposed to be code, they supposed to quantify shit."
- The Onion
The Dark wrote:
What of it? Saudi Arabia still has (AFAIK) more Abrams tanks than the US military.
Since when is 315 more then 8000? A single US heavy division has about as many M1's and M2's as the whole Saudi military.
Iraq wouldn't be stupid enough to attack Kuwait again...Hussein is many things; an idiot is not one of them.
He's proved pretty fucking stupid when it comes to wars.
Jordan has very difficult terrain to invade, and any invasion would be slow enough that even the lethargic titan of the US military could most likely deploy there in order to prevent its investiture by Iraq.
Jordan is excellent tank country, its only physical defence is distance.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Admiral Valdemar wrote:
And what about NK? Should we not also be going in there since they can be classed as more of a threat?
And I still don't see any WMD.
no reason to go there, they have no oil.
That, and the last Korean war wasn't a clear victory. (Not for lack of trying by our troops). No President would be excited at the prospect of rolling into a jungle where we were unable to clearly succeed before.
And let's not forget that they are black belts in Taekwondo. (At least South Korean officers are, according to the CNN Presents special on the Korean DMZ. Wouldn't surprise me if NK officers are, as well.)
Traceroute wrote:That, and the last Korean war wasn't a clear victory.
Both sides had their victory since both got what they initially wanted (save South Korea; keep America off the border). Everything else just wasn't worth more dying.
The three best things in life are a good landing, a good orgasm, and a good bowel movement. The night carrier landing is one of the few opportunities in life where you get to experience all three at the same time. -Unknown
Traceroute wrote:And let's not forget that they are black belts in Taekwondo. (At least South Korean officers are, according to the CNN Presents special on the Korean DMZ. Wouldn't surprise me if NK officers are, as well.)
Reminds me of a stand-up comic I saw on Comedy Central (can't remember his name). "People are asking why we don't invade North Korea. Because all the Koreans probably know karate!"
Damien Sorresso
"Ever see what them computa bitchez do to numbas? It ain't natural. Numbas ain't supposed to be code, they supposed to quantify shit."
- The Onion
(At least South Korean officers are, according to the CNN Presents special on the Korean DMZ. Wouldn't surprise me if NK officers are, as well.)