Interesting Documents
Deep Kimchi
20-02-2006, 23:18
I'll have to look at these in detail. They came from the work of the Iraq Survey Group.
I would suggest each of you take a look at the documents, and tell me what you think they mean.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200410%5CNAT20041011a.html
Imperiux
20-02-2006, 23:20
yawn. Boring
The Nazz
20-02-2006, 23:22
Who did the translations? I mean, it's not as though CNS is exactly an honest arbiter most of the time when it comes to this kind of stuff.
I'm not dismissing them out of hand--obviously, I haven't had the time to read them if I'm replying this quickly--I'm just asking because the source is questionable and has consistently shown a bias heavily in favor of the Bush administration.
Achtung 45
20-02-2006, 23:32
I'll have to look at these in detail. They came from the work of the Iraq Survey Group.
I would suggest each of you take a look at the documents, and tell me what you think they mean.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200410%5CNAT20041011a.html
It's nothing that more revealing than the Downing street memos. Also, I don't view this as an issue of whether or not Saddam was a threat to the U.S., anymore, or whether he was actively developing WMDs, but as Bush failing to level with the American public. This isn't directly about the justification of the Iraq war, it's about Bush making up many excuses justifying the invasion and then changing his story when one was challenged and dismissed.
This is by far the most secretive Administration America has ever seen, and that is exactly what the founders of this country were trying to avoid. Secrecy leads to corruption. We saw that with Nixon and many other administrations Republicans and Democrats alike. Don't get me wrong, some level of secrecy is vital to the function of our government, but Bush is taking it much too far.
I'll have to look at these in detail. They came from the work of the Iraq Survey Group.
I would suggest each of you take a look at the documents, and tell me what you think they mean.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200410%5CNAT20041011a.html
I think it highly unlikely that the US administration ignored a chance to wave these about and say "we were right" repeatedly while pumping out the details left right and center. Were they genuine, they would have been in the ISG final report. Plus why are they not on CNN. Faux, BBC etc?