Bush Screwed Up In Iraq

Published on December 9, 2005 By COL Gene In Politics

There was no immediate danger from Iraq in early 2003. Even if Saddam had the WMD that Bush claimed, he had no way to use any WMD against the Unites States. If Saddam had the means to deliver WMD he would never have used it against the United States because of the consequences. Thus, no matter what the truth was about WMD, Saddam did not pose any danger to us and there was NO justification to invade Iraq.

The U N had weapons Inspectors in Iraq in early 2003 and had we allowed them to complete their inspections we would have learned what we know today-Saddam had no WMD.

Bush had intelligence available to him that was NOT available to Congress which contradicted his claim that Saddam had WMD. Bush only used the intelligence that supported his decision to invade Iraq.

The White House told everyone that the war was to be quick and clean. The estimated cost was placed at $40 billion. We were told our troops would be welcomed as liberators. This was 100% incorrect.

Bush ignored the advice of his most senior generals and sent less then half the number of troops needed to control Iraq. That has caused many unneeded American Military deaths and injuries because of the insurrection we did not prevent from developing.

The insurrection that developed because we did not send the number of troops required to establish security in Iraq now threatens the establishment of any stable government and has prevented the rebuilding of Iraq. Unemployment is at about 60% and utility services are not much different then under Saddam.

There is a very good chance that the government that develops in Iraq will be one that is either like Iran or one that will allow terrorist groups to operate and sponsor future attacks against the United States.

We have alienated many of our allies and have enabled the radical Moslem factions to use our invasion of Iraq as a recruiting tool to add to the number of radicals that will be willing to attack the United States in the future.

There was NO “War on Terrorism” in Iraq when Bush invaded them in 2003. That started AFTER we deposed Saddam and disbanded their army. Iraq was not responsible for 9/11.

Bush had NO exit plan for the Iraq War.

Comments (Page 5)

drmiler

on Dec 13, 2005

They believed it because of what Bush said and because they were not given all the intel that refuted the Bush/Cheney claims. If everyone, Republicans and Democtrats would have known what they know today, there would have been NO approvel to invade Iraq. If they had the intel Bush ignored, there would not have been a war

Did you read a damn word he said? Let me help.

And you are wrong as usual. Democrats believed Saddam had WMD and that Saddam was a threat way before Bush was elected.

READ the bold text....or at least try to.

Island Dog

on Dec 13, 2005

Col you have not read anything that has been posted. Clinton said Saddam had WMD's and was a threat. The democratic Senators who voted for the war said Saddam was a threat and had WMD's even before Bush was elected. Were they liars col? You can't blame this on Bush.

You still haven't answered the question I have asked several times.

COL Gene

on Dec 13, 2005

Democrats may have believed Saddam had WMD but did not take the United States to War. Many other dangerous countries have WMD like Iran and North Korea. In fact they have the WMD that Ssddam did not have. Most of the Intel that Bush used abour WMD came from a single source-- Ahmad Chalabi. For a President to take this country to War predicated of information from a person like that shows the lack of judgement of GWB.

What was Bush afraid of when he did not disclose the intrel that DID NOT support what he and Cheney were saying? Why did the Congress not have the same intel as Bush and Cheney? Why did Bush ignore the Intel that did not agree with attacking Iraq?

Almost all the sources Bush used to justify this war have now been shown to be incorrect. Most of the Intel that did not support attacking Iraq has been shown to be correct including the judgement of Bush 41 which GWB ignored. The justification Bush used for the Iraq War shows just how poor a President GWB is.

Island Dog

on Dec 13, 2005

Col you are avoiding the question as usual. You say Bush is a liar for claiming Iraq was a threat and had WMD. Why do you give democrats a pass? They voted for the war, so by your standards they are liars also. Hypocrit.

Why did the Congress not have the same intel as Bush and Cheney?

Please provide proof of this.

Col you have avoided most things that have shown you to be wrong here. You have lost again.

Daiwa

on Dec 13, 2005

Now that is clear that the USA will have to exit from Iraq without a plan to put together a stable legitimate government in Iraq, that country will emerge as a great threat to US political interests in the region.

What cave are you living in, Bahu? Osama there with you, by chance?

Cheers,
Daiwa

COL Gene

on Dec 14, 2005

The proof is that statements from Congressmen who have said they did not have the intel that refuted what Bush was saying in late 2002 and early 2003. CIA, Dept of Energy and DIA all had intel that said the Bush/Cheney claims about WMD were not true. They were correct and the intel Bush used was wrong.

Island Dog

on Dec 14, 2005

The proof is that statements from Congressmen who have said they did not have the intel that refuted what Bush was saying in late 2002 and early 2003.

What Congressman? I have seen others say they saw the same intelligence. You still haven't answered the questions that are being asked.

DJBandit

on Dec 14, 2005

I think I get Island Dog. He is playing the same repetition game Col plays. Fight fire with fire. Not a bad idea, I'm just not one with enough patience to do it.

Col is playing Dodgeball with ID except that no matter how many times he gets hit he still thinks he's in the game.

I believe that the best way to play Col's game is by posting on his articles facts that disprove what he claims without addressing it to him directly. And then continue to post it just like he continues to repeat his side of the story. Incredibly I have to hand it to him for repeating himself several times without actually copying and pasting.

COL Gene

on Dec 14, 2005

If that were correct the Senate Select Intel committee phase II hearings would not be taking place. That is what will lay out who knew what and when did they know it. I can not wait to see what that produces. The GOP has delayed that for almost two years. I wonder WHY?

For example, Congress was not told that most of the WMD Intel came from Chalabi. They were not told the Dept of energy refuted the Bush claim that the AL tubes were proof of Saddam's nuclear weapons program. The inrel that said the Mobile Chemical labs were not true was not known when the vote was taken. We will see just how much other intel that did not support Bush/ Cheney was withheld from Congress and the public before they voted to allow Bush to invade Iraq from the Senate phase II hearings.

COL Gene

on Dec 14, 2005

Daiwa

Since the majority no longer support the war and we know we were not welcomed as liberators, it is a good bet that Congress would not have approved going to war if they had the knowledge of how the war has turned out to date.

Chaos Manager

on Dec 14, 2005

Since the majority no longer support the war and we know we were not welcomed as liberators, it is a good bet that Congress would not have approved going to war if they had the knowledge of how the war has turned out to date.

And if I knew that I'd get food poisoning last night from eating at the diner down the street from my office, I would've skipped stopping for dinner on the way home and just fixed dinner there.

Isn't 20/20 hindsight a wonderful thing?

Gene, if you could predict the future as well as you try and predict what SHOULD'VE or WOULD'VE happened "if I only knew then, what I know now" then you'd be extremely rich and be pissed that all these people are trying to take your money to give it to the poor.

COL Gene

on Dec 14, 2005

What is sad is that some including Bush, knowing what we know today, claim they would make the same mistake again. That shows me that Bush and anyone that thinks like him are dangerous. Failing to learn from your mistakes is a just DUMB!

drmiler

on Dec 14, 2005

That being said....have you looked in a mirror lately?

COL Gene

on Dec 14, 2005

Yes I change when the path I am on does not achieve the results. Stay the Course when you are on the wrong course is not smart.

Today Bush admitted that the reasons he used to go to war were almost all wrong. In his next statement he said but he did the right thing. That makes No sense.

Island Dog

on Dec 15, 2005

Yes I change when the path I am on does not achieve the results.

Then why do you continue to write these blogs that don't change anything. You are not getting results so you should stop, right?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!