Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Dec 16, 2003.
Kinda hard to vote against a war that you are told is a serious and immediate threat to our national security.
It will be interesting to see if there really was a classified briefing where senators were given a, shall we say, biased view of the intelligence. And how many senators were there if there was. And of course, who gave the briefing and where did the original intel come from.
Sometimes its hard to believe anyone swallowed this.
Geographical: Where is the USA, where is Iraq?
Technical: how long would it take an unmanned drone to get from Point A to Point B, without being noticed and remote controlled? Give or take the fact that Iraq had Technology that was hardly better than 1950...
and that prague contact with Al Qeada was fake too. Nothing matters because we are good.
British MPs (and the public) were misled also. It turns out that Blair and those high up in the Gov. knew that the 45 minutes to readiness claim for WMD (?!) referred only to battlefield weapons (ie short-range munitions).
However, the way it was publicized made this deliberately unclear meaning the press, and lowly MPs, were always under the impression that long-range strategic WMD could be fired at British troops in Cyprus, etc, within 45 minutes of the signal.
When questioned recently about allowing this misconception to abound, Blair's response was that it was impossible to refute every error of fact reported by the press! This contrasts starkly to the manic attempts to correct a single BBC radio item in July (about the Gov handling of the WMD dossiers) which resulted in a man's death and the Hutton enquiry.