Despite Knowledge That Iran Halted Nuke Program, White House Continued To Warn Of False Threat
Despite Knowledge That Iran Halted Nuke Program, White House Continued To Warn Of False Threat
The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released today concludes that “in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” It adds that “Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007,” and the country is “less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005.”
The assessment, which relies on data collected through Oct. 31, was reportedly completed in 2006, but was blocked by administration officials who wanted it to be more in line with Vice President Cheney’s hardline views.
As The Washington Monthly’s Kevin Drum notes, the NIE’s “basic parameters were almost certainly common knowledge in the White House” at least by last year, when the document was finished. Yet even in the past two months, the administration has continued to push its faulty, inflammatory rhetoric and claim that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Some examples:
“So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously.” [Bush, 10/17/07]
“Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions. … The Iranian regime needs to know that if it stays on its present course the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences.” [Cheney, 10/21/07]
“The problem is Iran, and Iran has not stepped back from trying to pursue a nuclear weapon, and — or reprocessing and enriching uranium, which would lead to a nuclear weapon.” [White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, 10/26/07]
“We talked about Iran and the desire to work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions, for the sake of peace.” [Bush, 11/7/07]
“We’re in a position now, clearly, especially when we look at Iran, where it’s very, very important we succeed in our efforts, our national security efforts, to discourage the Iranians from enriching uranium and producing nuclear weapons.” [Cheney, 11/9/07]
“We are convinced that they are developing nuclear weapons.” [Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, 11/13/07]
The White House isn’t yet ready to give up its spin. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley will be speaking to the press at 3:15 PM EST today, and has already claimed that the NIE “confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons.”
UPDATE: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently said, “It would be a strategic calamity to attack Iran at this time.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
HACKS..LIARS….LIARS….and HACKS…
Why hasn’t the plane for the Hague taken off yet???
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:11 pmMy prediction: The 24%ers will be unmoved.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:11 pmBush/Cheney: Oh, look, an Iranian litterbug. We have to nuke Tehran.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:12 pmsarc off.
Awww, are we having trouble “fixing” the intelligence to meet PNAC’s agenda?
Let’s send this one to the geniuses over on Madison Ave.
They could sell a popsicle to an Eskimo.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:13 pmIf this administration showed as much concern for global warming as it does for Iraq’s nuclear weapons despite the overwhelming evidence for the former and the underwhelming evidence for the latter . . .
oh well, its nice to dream
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:15 pmHe must have Abraham Lincoln-like honorable reasons to keep lying like this.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:15 pmDon’t worry reich-wingers, you still have denial on your side.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:15 pmReich-wingers are always on the wrong side of every issue….you think they would learn eventually.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:16 pmHow long till Cheney quits saying that Iran is developing Nukes ?
Answer: How was it thill Cheney quit saying that Iraq had WMDs. Oh wait, he’s still saying that.
And for the public, how many still say that Clinton stole the “W” keys from the computers and trashed the WH ?
As everyone should have heard from their grandmother - once a lie starts, it is almost impossible to stop it.
(Actually, that’s a pretty good vision statement for the Neocons)
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:16 pm“…the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions. …”
Dick Cheney
That’s right, Dick. C’mon international community, don’t let Cheney fulfill his grandest ambitions of attacking yet another sovereign nation that has been cleared by the nuclear watchdogs. Someone stop this traitorous loose cannon before he causes more trouble.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:19 pmFrom 2004 through 2006, Iran did agree to suspend all uranium enrichment activities; thus halting what everyone agrees they’re legally entitled to. That was an agreement with the European Union.
“In return to their agreement to suspension of their uranium enrichment program, the European Union was to provide what were called full guarantees on security issues, which means getting the United States to call off its threats to attack and destroy Iran.”
The EU failed to live up to its obligations so Iran pulled out of the agreement and returned to uranium enrichment. But Iranians were accused of breaking the agreement.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 pmHere’s what I’ll NEVER understand. That these guys are so incompetent that they didn’t think to have a few actual WMDs handy to sprinkle about. Something, anything that they had kept around since Gulf War I so that they could definitively say that there were live, deployable WMDs found in Iraq. Our soldiers know that a dead non-combatant can quickly become a terrorist if you throw some wire or a rifle on their corpse but their leaders didn’t have a clue. But they were THAT stupid. And that speaks volumes.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:25 pmBy the way, I did mean Iran in my previous post… for some reason I’m getting confused between Iran and Iraq….
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:26 pmAnd Nancy and Harry are still continuing to enable these crooks and liars? They are worthless, too!
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:28 pm14…dig deeper. You’ll see they’re not.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:29 pmWe have sen this movie before but don’t worry the Repukes will turn around & then claim that it’ the Dems who were pushing action on Iran just like Rove now been trying to re-write history on Iraq.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:29 pmHow is this “spin” — the document states that Iran is not while the President and various members of his administration claim it is. Both cannot be correct. So, one is lying. And if it is the POTUS, why isn’t that actionable? Especially in a matter such as this. If high crimes and misdemeanors has a meaning, lying to the US public to get them to spend treasure and lives on yet another lie should certainly qualify. Seriously, folks, this nonsense must stop else everyone after him will think “spinning” this way is acceptable. It is not.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pmThe assessment, which relies on data collected through Oct. 31, was reportedly completed in 2006, but was blocked by administration officials who wanted it to be more in line with Vice President Cheney’s hardline views.
And to influence the ‘06 elections in any way possible.
Hell, they admit to lying to ‘be more in line with VP Cheney’s hardline’.
Impeach. Investigate. Incarcerate. Impale.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pmHeres the real reason
The New IAEA regulations should keep newcomers away from producing their own enriched uranium. The US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, China and Japan will become the world’s nuclear filling stations. Under the auspices of the IAEA these suppliers will dictate the rules, the prices and the currencies they want to get paid in. Iran has become the pretext and test case for their plans. The problems of tomorrow’s world economy are being shaped today.
we now have an anti-Iranian alliance of the US and E3. They smell the opportunity for a coup to seize world’s nuclear fuel market. To succeed, they would just need some legal sauce on the prohibition of uranium enrichment by non-nuclear-weapon states, with Iran as example. And a UN Security Council resolution would be enough, if it legalizes IAEA’s stand that it can forbid countries to enrich uranium.
Of course, they would make it impossible for Iran to stay within the Non-Proliferation Treaty then. To succeed their coup, they will have to take care, that Iran does not leave the organization before a resolution is successfully voted. For if so, there would not be any ground for a resolution anymore.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pmhttp://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=551761
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:31 pmOn the surface, it sounds like Bush and Co are making this a safer world. I’m interested in your take.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 3, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
for whom? and how does Iran not having a nuclear program make for a safer world? cheney will only attack countries that he is sure he can defeat easily, even though he was wrong about Iraq, but any country with nukes is safe from the US. that’s a safer world, for those people.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:31 pmSo Iran stopped all their Nuke activity or not?
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:33 pmAlright, I’ll bite, No. 14
First, isn’t the administrations intelligence so inadequate (according to many progressives after finding no WMD) that it can’t really be relied on?
You are correct, the administration’s intelligence cannot be trusted. But this missive appears to be from sources other than the administrations. The adminiistration’s purported intelligence claims that Iran is building nukes and will be showing a mushroom cloud to the world (presumably over our oil in their land, Israel or NYC take your pick) as soon as it is able to do so.
And also, doesn’t the idea that Iran has halted its nuke program (if you believe it) suggest that it had a nuke program before Bush came into office (under Clinton). If they halted it in 2003, doesn’t it make it seem that the program has been successfully halted during and because of the Bush administration tenure?
Iran likely had a peaceful nuclear program. Like Saddam, Iran probably would like its nuclear armed neighbors (and the West) to believe it has or is working on nuclear weapons. It appears to be the only way to get US to sit down and chat before just invading. Strange, I know, but when someone is dictating that you do this or that or else people, especially heads of sovereign nations, tend to get a little pissed and try and figure out a way to protect their nation from aggression.
Hope this helped.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:35 pm23 / Wind up merchant - So Iran stopped all their Nuke activity or not?
No they are entitled to enrich their uranium with 3000 cetrifuges and America cannot stop them
Tough shit read 20
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:35 pmThe International agency has determined that Iran has no weapons program. This administration is once again proving themselves to be liars, charlatans and misanthropes.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:38 pmAnd nobody’s surprised.
What a revoltin development.
Just as well because if America started vapourizing Iranian kids with Nuclear weapons, the world would be against them BIG TIME
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:40 pmIf they halted it in 2003, doesn’t it make it seem that the program has been successfully halted during and because of the Bush administration tenure?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
I don’t believe anything the nutjob in Iran says any more than I believe the nutjob currently squatting in our WH. Both are petulant little men who wouldn’t know the truth if it walked up and bit them.
It is a case of dumb and dumber.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:40 pmOn the surface, it sounds like Bush and Co are making this a safer world. I’m interested in your take.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 3, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
Attacking a country that didn’t attack us is making “a safer world”?
Threatening to start WWIII with a country that halted their nuke program 4 years ago is making “a safer world”?
Not catching or caring about the man responsible for 9/11 is making “a safer world”?
Not catching or caring about the people responsible for the Anthrax attacks on our country AFTER 9/11 is making “a safer world”?
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:40 pmI’m disappointed. RogerX2 didn’t mention “socialism”, his favorite word with no meaning.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:41 pmf they halted it in 2003, doesn’t it make it seem that the program has been successfully halted during and because of the Bush administration tenure?
Please provide your evidence that their halt “because of the herr dubyah administration tenure”. Next, why does the herr dubyah administration continue to claim they are making a nuclear weapon, if, by your accounts, halted their program “because of the herr dubyah administration tenure”.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pmWhy the change of heart , Maybe because Russia and China dont want to be a part of another untruthfull UN resolution
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pmhere is why they halted and WHY
From 2004 through 2006, Iran did agree to suspend all uranium enrichment activities; thus halting what everyone agrees they’re legally entitled to. That was an agreement with the European Union.
“In return to their agreement to suspension of their uranium enrichment program, the European Union was to provide what were called full guarantees on security issues, which means getting the United States to call off its threats to attack and destroy Iran.â€
The EU failed to live up to its obligations so Iran pulled out of the agreement and returned to uranium enrichment. But Iranians were accused of breaking the agreement.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:44 pmBush insane. Bush insane for war. Bush insane for torture. Bush insane for election theft. Bush insane for fascism. Bush insane for treason. Bush insane.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:46 pmHow many CIA agents will be exposed in retaliation for the revelation of this embarrassing news?
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:49 pmHow many lies and propagandist statements from the mouths of our top officials are we going to permit? This is becoming more than pathologica - it’s becoming overtly criminal. Time to either impeach Bush and Cheney or send them off to a mental ward.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:49 pmI’m thrilled that one of their own agencies is calling bullshit on them! Hah!
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:50 pmWell, they have nothing else to run on but the fear card.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:50 pmRICO prosecution is the only remedy for the GOP and their ongoing criminal enterprise.
disband the GOP and prohibit their leaders from participation in government, including 527 membership, lobbying, and fundraising.
that would finally buy enough slack that Dem’s like Harman, Feinstein, and Lieberman could be gotten rid of without handing the game back to the criminals-in-suits in the process.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:50 pmTime for Congress to take these frauds out of office or become “complicit” themselves in the dragging of feet. They’ve had plenty of impeachable offenses and war crimes to use as ammunition but have failed the people miserably on instead “aiding and abetting” this criminal regime.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:51 pmtom Baker: I believe you’re onto something big here. It is time for the GOP to be put out of business. All they’ve done is continue to perpetuate and protect liars, perverts, and criminals. Time to disband them and remove them as a valid political party.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:53 pmGlenn Reynolds makes an excellent point:
“But what could have happened in 2003 that might have persuaded the Iranians to stop work on a weapon of mass destruction?”
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:53 pmGlenn Reynolds makes an excellent point:
“But what could have happened in 2003 that might have persuaded the Iranians to stop work on a weapon of mass destruction?â€
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 3:53 pm
##
2003 was also before European sanctions went into effect, meaning Iran largely buckled under diplomatic pressure, not isolation, or, yes, war.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:56 pmSecretary of Defense Robert Gates recently said, “It would be a strategic calamity to attack Iran at this time.â€
I agree with the SecDef on this one. Why are Exley and his trollites calamitously stupid?
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:57 pmComment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 3:53 pm
Maybe they realized they didn’t need nukes to attack the U.S. Just a few dudes with boxcutters could totally disrupt the infrastructure of the country and cost it trillions of dollars for years to come. No real need to spend their own money on a nuclear program.
If you’re suggesting that they disbanded a nuclear program because of the attack on Iraq, that doesn’t make any sense. Iraq didn’t have a nuclear program and they were attacked. Iraq didn’t attack the U.S. and they were attacked. Iraq didn’t even have WMD and they were attacked. Why would Iran disband their defence system to avoid an attack when preemptive attacks can be based on fake intelligence? They must know that if the U.S. chooses to attack them it will have little to do with their actions and everything to do with oil.
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:57 pmGlenn Reynolds makes an excellent point:
“But what could have happened in 2003 that might have persuaded the Iranians to stop work on a weapon of mass destruction?â€
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 3:53 pm
The better question would be:
“But why does the current administration continue to claim the contrary and continue to push for war with Iran?â€
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:58 pmComment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 3:53 pm
##
I would expect them to resume their program, however, since the US does not attack countries that have nukes - just ask Pakistan
December 3rd, 2007 at 3:59 pmI like how the couple of wingers who’ve posted seem to miss the point that Dubbie and his crew are unrepentant LIARS.
I’d like to be a liar for those wingers, too, and make a handsome profit in the process.
Hey Wingers!! I’ve got viagra for .25 a pill - how many do you want????
Why do you wingers cut so much slack for liars????
How many used cars have you been ripped off on???
Either you like being lied to, or you’re just so deeply cynical that you know in your heart that lying is all that anyone ever does, so it’s always ok - I pity your business associates and your families.
Talk about deficient moral character - whew!! - you wingers have redefined what immoral is - taken it to a whole new level of sleaze, depravity, denial, and betrayal - you’ve outdone the pimps and the whores, the embezzlers and the cons who work old people for their medicine money - televangelists are looking credible compared to Righties these days. Here’s my 2 cents - use the snake oil to lube up your assault rifles and Cheney yourselves into comas.
Bring Righty Down For Good!!!
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:01 pmReich-wingers are so desperately, and not so subtly, attempting to spin this as some sort of herr dubyah “victory”.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:01 pm“Just a couple of points from a 24%er.
First, isn’t the administrations intelligence so inadequate (according to many progressives after finding no WMD) that it can’t really be relied on?”
Their intelligence wasn’t “inadequate”, it was “misrepresented” to congress and the american people.
“Misrepresented” of course is a charitable way of saying it was a lie.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:01 pm“But what could have happened in 2003 that might have persuaded the Iranians to stop work on a weapon of mass destruction?â€
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 3:53 pm
Why not read the very brief report itself?
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:01 pm…And the House of Bush comes tumbling down!…..
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:02 pmThe media today acknowledged only one part in this two-part train wreck called the Bush Administration - they only announced the report and the fact that Iran gave up their nuke capabilities back in 2003 - what they failed to report was even more damaging and incriminating to Bush and his Cadre of Frauds - that they knowingly were misleading the public - ONCE AGAIN! Now their hands are caught in the cookie jar and even those 24%ers have to be scratching their heads and realizing that either they’re just as mentally compromised as those lying or that they’ve been duped by “Team Bush” once again. What losers.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:04 pmSo, the most important question: how many CIA agents will be exposed in retaliation for this revelation?
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:05 pmGummitch,
And who do think was at the forefront of that “increasing international scrutiny and pressure????”
That’s right….The United States under the leadership of President George W. Bush.
The key now is to maintain that pressure and scrutiny initiated by President Bush to keep the Iranians from regenerating the nuclear weapons program that we got them to suspend in 2003.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:05 pmGummitch: It’s an impossibility to get frauds like Exley and the mentally-challenged trolls to read anything - even My Pet Goat would be challenging for them - like it, no doubt, was for The Shrub.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:05 pmComment by CaptainMantastic — December 3, 2007 @ 4:03 pm
You didn’t answer one question directed at you and you brought up Clinton….indeed, you are typical myopic and moronic reich-winger. Thanks for the proof.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:06 pmExley arrives, unicorn-mounted, to conjecture up a chimera of credibility for his ungrateful Leader.
You are (conditionally, of course) awesome, Ex! - what a hero!!
I’ll bet Ari will buy you that lunch at Red Lobster now, for sure.
Too bad we can’t count those imaginary accomplishments, because they are - FICTION!
With Love,
Jack Bauer
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:07 pmExley: Pull my finger….hurry up now…..because I’ve got a nice juicy loud one to blast you with! ahahahah! I hope you’re being funny showering accolades on this group of war mongers?? The disgusting truth is emerging and this is just another example of the level of fraud these guys will stoop to. No doubt Bush’s quotes to trump up the fear level will be front and center this week! More comic relief for the people.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:07 pmSometimes, the better option is to stand your ground; despite how unpopular it may seem.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 3, 2007 @ 4:03 pm
You mean threatening WWIII with a country that is not producing nukes is “standing your ground”? Brilliant.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:08 pmIraq did the same thing… didn’t stop us from invading them…
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:09 pmThe key now is to maintain that pressure and scrutiny initiated by President Bush to keep the Iranians from regenerating the nuclear weapons program that we got them to suspend in 2003.
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
“Keep the Iranians from regenerating the nuclear program”? Herr dubyah and his administration keeps telling the world that Iran is making a nuclear weapon and herr dubyah threatened Iran with WWIII. Apparently you are not able to grasp the disconnect.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:10 pmI’m wondering just how many lies we can now catch them on by revisiting their televised statements. Maybe even their little airhead Perino will be caught falsifying Iran’s capabilities. Maybe she’ll get to do a little time before long, too? Let the research begin - let’s find every Bush clip we can that trumps up the lie about Iran, shall we? This task should be like child’s play.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:10 pmAnd who do think was at the forefront of that “increasing international scrutiny and pressure????â€
That’s right….The United States under the leadership of President George W. Bush.
The key now is to maintain that pressure and scrutiny initiated by President Bush to keep the Iranians from regenerating the nuclear weapons program that we got them to suspend in 2003.
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
Again you demonstrate an inexhaustible dishonesty. Your comment implied that something “happened in 2003″ to account for the suspension. Now, suddenly, it’s about scrutiny rather than your clear implication that it was about the invasion of Iraq.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:10 pmI still don’t understand what the whole problem is with Iran having nukes? It is not like they could use them. The US has nukes, and so does Israel, Pakistan, India, and everyone else. Let them waste their money on it if that is what they want to do. Hell, sell them some of ours, so we can get the money.
Now, does anybody want to take a bet on trolls still pushing for war with Iran?
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:11 pm“You wouldn’t recommend an abused woman, living under the threat of a violent husband, to just do her best to get along.”
Is that the best you can do? No, you’d tell the abused woman to move on, just like every sane, rational thinking American should be telling the Bush administration — move on and go pick on someone else.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pmOn the surface, it sounds like Bush and Co are making this a safer world. I’m interested in your take.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
Safe for who, POS? One million Iraqis?
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pmAnd who do think was at the forefront of that “increasing international scrutiny and pressure????â€
That’s right….The United States under the leadership of President George W. Bush.
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
And I forgot to note: no. It was the Europeans. In 2003, Bush was too deeply involved in starting an unnecessary invasion. More of your dishonesty, Exley.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pmPoor Veritas…He is devastated to see the NIE that ThinkProgress has so long called for has been released and actually shows that President Bush’s strategy of diplomacy, tough talk and military action against Iraq has now conclusively been shown to be one of the most successful efforts against the proliferation of WMDs in history….
Iraq, Libya and Iran — all nations that would have moved forward with WMD production had it not been for the deposing of Saddam Hussein — are now shown to have abandoned their WMD ambitions thanks to George W. Bush….
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:13 pmSo this report was completed in 2006, eh? That means that for at least a year, Team Bush suppressed this intelligence information. That means that for one year (at the veryleast and perhaps more depending when it was completed in 2006) Bush Cabal was lying to the people. I submit that intentionally supressing intelligence data is an act of treason against this country. It should be punishable with not only removal from office but prison time as well.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:14 pmBut what could have happened in 2003 that might have persuaded the Iranians to stop work on a weapon of mass destruction?â€
Comment by Exley
The US broke international law and invaded a country? Hmmm…not the first time.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:15 pmall nations that would have moved forward with WMD production had it not been for the deposing of Saddam Hussein
what a crock of unmitigated conjecture.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:15 pm#63… don’t bother. The trolls here suffer a certain disconnect brought about by money. They’ll defend Bush until their last paycheck. And that’s all. Then they’ll try to get another job at Best Buy or Red Lobster.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:15 pmGummitch,
If you think that the deposing of Saddam Hussein was not part of the international pressure that seemingly caused the Iranians to abandon their nuclear weapons program in 2003, you are even more naive than I initially believed.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:15 pmDarn, I was going to write a fictional story where the intellegence community leaked secret information to stop a mad leader. I guess now I’ll have to start to write a fictional account of a Secret Service agent that shoots a rogue president.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:16 pmNow can we impeach this idiot? What in the world is it going to take to get this moron out of the White House?
I swear, the Republicans have got to be tired of this shit, too, huh?
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:17 pmNice try, Exley! Nice try! The pertinent issue here is not if anything Chimpy had done has had some effect which is definitely not anything which can be proven in a court of law. The fact is that Bush and Cheney suppressed this intelligence and evidence for over a year while lying to the people about Iran and their intentions for war with a sovereign nation. That’s the critical piece of evidence here.
Proving that something occurred as a side effect of something else is like putting on your tin foil hat, poor demented one, once again. Don’t you have a fedora lying around somewhere? We’re tired of the pointed tin foil millinery you continue to wear on these threads.
Get a life, Ex before it’s too late for you. Trying to spin something positive out of PURE TREASON is simply an impossibility. But, thanks for trying. Your efforts are well recognized (and we know who you are, too).
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:17 pmIf this is such a great piece of news, why did the admin sit on it for a year/?? Hmm???
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:18 pmi’m not sure i’d accuse others of being naive after typing the words “President Bush’s strategy of diplomacy”
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:19 pmIraq, Libya and Iran — all nations that would have moved forward with WMD production had it not been for the deposing of Saddam Hussein — are now shown to have abandoned their WMD ambitions thanks to George W. Bush….
Comment by Exley
Don’t worry. You will find another reason to fear those countries and promote a peaceful bombing.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:19 pmThe prima facie evidence in a court of law would be the tons of video clips of both Bush and Cheney stating their case based on lies against Iran. The prima facie evidence would be how they repeatedly tried to make the case for Iran not complying with their wishes while, in fact, they both knew that Iran was in compliance since 2006! Amazing how they’ve now trapped themselves…..a noose they will not easily slip out of. The evidence is there and can’t be rewritten or erased. I think it’s over for the Bush Cabal - and not a moment too soon.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:20 pmI was hoping we could all just sit for a second and be grateful that Iran isn’t developing a nuke. This is good news, remember :-).
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:21 pmwhat a crock of unmitigated conjecture.
Comment by RUCerious
I like to call it, Bubble Propagandagum.
Chew after chew after chew of misinformation and jingoistic paranoia!
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:21 pmThis is not proof of anything working at all beyond Iran deciding on their own to comply. This is about Bush and Cheney lying knowingly to the people in making a case for war with Iran just as we now know they did in the run up to war with Iraq. This time The People have all of the evidence they need to see how demonic these leaders are and how they will lie and cheat to get their way. Ain’t going to happen now.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:22 pmfrom the actual report, idiot trolls..
“We judge with high confidence
that the halt, and Tehran’s announcement of its decision to suspend its declared uranium
enrichment program and sign an Additional Protocol to its Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty Safeguards Agreement, was directed primarily in response to increasing
international scrutiny and pressure resulting from exposure of Iran’s previously
undeclared nuclear work.”
nothing about herr Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq….
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:22 pmPresident dubyah’s strategy of diplomacy, tough talk and military action against Iraq has now conclusively been shown to be one of the most successful efforts against the proliferation of WMDs in history
Why is herr dubyah and his administration still claiming the Iran is trying to get nukes?
How does attacking a country that doesn’t have WMD have to do with efforts against the proliferation of WMDs?
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:23 pmSean C,
I agree. It is very good news.
But credit should be given where credit is due. If true, it is a victory for Bush’s diplomatic and military strategy to halt the proliferation of WMDs.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:23 pmTrolls are fictional; they don’t really exist. You can’t convince them; they are designed to be unconvincable and thus dissuade us from engaging with the Republican base.
Talk about trolls if you must. Point out how their authors are trying to sow doubt, deflect blame, or distract. Point out that they never provide a relevent link.
If you engage with them, they get to make public discussion increasing nasty and unlikely to take place in the real world.
No one is as close-minded and immune to reason as “Exley”, “CaptainMantastic”, or “DreamCrusher” in real life; it is just not possible.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:23 pmOh shit, just got a call from a neighbor.
The LyingBastardometer is going off in the garage again, must’ve gotten ahold of this article somehow.
Gotta go and turn it off before the cops come about the racket…
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:24 pmPoor Veritas…He is devastated to see the NIE that ThinkProgress has so long called for has been released and actually shows that President Bush’s strategy of diplomacy, tough talk and military action against Iraq has now conclusively been shown to be one of the most successful efforts against the proliferation of WMDs in history….
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
###
You must not have read the full article. It directly correlates this drawdown from nuclear production with diplomatic pressure from Europe. The last time I looked at a globe, the US was not in Europe.
“Iraq, Libya and Iran — all nations that would have moved forward with WMD production had it not been for the deposing of Saddam Hussein — are now shown to have abandoned their WMD ambitions thanks to George W. Bush….”
Right. Saddam was helping Iran develop nukes. Sure.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:24 pmIf you think that the deposing of Saddam Hussein was not part of the international pressure that seemingly caused the Iranians to abandon their nuclear weapons program in 2003, you are even more naive than I initially believed.
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
Continued dishonesty on your part is no longer a surprise. “Part of” is not “at the forefront”, which was your initial claim. Why not stop moving the goalposts, Exley?
Why does the NIE document not specifically mention the invasion of Iraq, Exley? Could it be that the people responsible for writing that document, who actually know what they’re talking about, didn’t think it was significant?
You need to get into the spin business. Your bone-deep dishonesty is a critical requirement.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:24 pmI’m just not seeing how this story hurts Bush or the administration.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 3, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
Herr dubyah and his administration continues to threaten to attack another country that doesn’t have WMD.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:25 pmIt’s all good news, Juan C. and the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It’s ALWAYS GOOD NEW to learn truth, regardless of how sleazy and unsavory it is which is precisely why these new truths are both good. Great that Iran has decided on their own to not build nukes; good that our intelligence agency found that to be true. Bad that Bush and Cheney were once again found to be fraudulent liars but good that the truth is now obvious for every american to see.
When truth prevails, it’s always a great thing, despite finding without a reasonable doubt that our lying leaders are nothing more than the “enemy within”.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:25 pmI’m just not seeing how this story hurts Bush or the administration.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 3, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
Of course you aren’t. That’s why treason is your friend. that’s why you cling to the party of treason, perverts, liars and mass-murderers. Because you have no moral compass.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:26 pmActually, I find a bit of humor in all of this: Today Bush puts his slimbag world bank fraud in charge of WMD’s - follow those dots…..from war monger/architect to deposed World Bank President (caught stealing) and now an expert on WMD’s…wow! That’s a stretch, isn’t it?
But of all days for this damaging evidence to come for War Team Bush - amazing coincidence! You’ve got to love the universe - it always has a crafty way of bringing forth the truth when we least expect it and when it can do the most damage.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:27 pmExley - IF I were to give Bush credit for this, it would be one positive comment at the end of pages of failures and abominations.
Either way… we can agree that this is good news :-).
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:27 pmCap.Manastic: No diagnosed sociopath has the required insight to recognize his psychiatric condition. So it goes with you….
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:27 pmsorry Juan C. - my comment above was directed at “Sean” instead. My bad! :)
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:28 pmGummitch,
Your reading comprehension skills are as weak as ever. Please read again posting #56 and then read your mischaracterization of said posting at your posting #93.
I’ll wait for your apology.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:29 pmTrolls are fictional; they don’t really exist. You can’t convince them; they are designed to be unconvincable and thus dissuade us from engaging with the Republican base.
Talk about trolls if you must. Point out how their authors are trying to sow doubt, deflect blame, or distract. Point out that they never provide a relevent link.
If you engage with them, they get to make public discussion increasing nasty and unlikely to take place in the real world.
No one is as close-minded and immune to reason as “Exleyâ€, “CaptainMantasticâ€, or “DreamCrusher†in real life; it is just not possible.
Comment by Peter C — December 3, 2007 @ 4:23 pm
###
Honestly, I have wondered about this myself. I am on TP off and on for a somewhat regular basis. I guess you could call me a regular here. But most of my time on the net is spent on vetvoice. It is a site made up of primarily veterans, and commenters who are still in Iraq. I never see trolls there. I never see guys like “Age of Rifles” or Exley. It just makes me wonder sometimes.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:29 pmI suspect that Sean is a concern troll as his continued softball approach to what definitely stacks up to treason by Bush and Cheney - yet he persists in attempting to paint this as an accomplishment.
Prove accomplishment, Exley and Sean using intelligence and data, please or STFU here. Just because something occurs coincidental to something else, there can be no legitimate or logical association imputed. GOP talking point today?? Is that where you got your disinformation?
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:30 pmVeritas - indeed. :-)
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:30 pmBut credit should be given where credit is due. If true, it is a victory for Bush’s diplomatic and military strategy to halt the proliferation of WMDs.
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:23 pm
Heckuva job they’ve done with Pakistan and Korea. You know, the ones who actually possess WMDs?
All Bush has succeeded in doing is convincing potential belligerents that his administration is so batshit that they need to seriously consider arming up in case he decides to invade.
And your claim about Libya is just more of your koolaid drinking, Exley.
Start reading with this.
More dishonesty, and naturally you’re right on board.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:30 pmExley - STFU and GFY while you do it. You’re one sad, twisted morass of eels and excrement of humanity.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:32 pmBut credit should be given where credit is due. If true, it is a victory for Bush’s diplomatic and military strategy to halt the proliferation of WMDs.
Comment by Exley
Good news for sure, however putting this at the feet of Bush is wrong. The international community is a large bunch of countries, some of which are doing business with Iran. They applied most of the pressure. The report does not mention bush at all, so to direct this at his *cough, cough* diplomacy is misguided. Suggesting that bush had anything to do with it is also belied by the fact that they have known for a long time that iran wasn’t pursueing these, but the administration was talking about WWIII all the while.
The WH is filed with keystone cops. I am reminded of a parable: even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then. That is the case here.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:32 pmI’m a “concern troll” now? I’ve been posting on this site quite a while, and have a long history of hating BushCo.
I just wanted to point out that it is GOOD that Iran isn’t developing nukes. Put credit wherever you want - I don’t care. I’m serving in the military, and I really didn’t want to get deployed to Iran. This is just great news for me. So… whatever. Normally I do care about the political side of things, but in this case… I just feel relieved that Iran isn’t developing nukes. It’s just that simple.
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:33 pmVeritas, I agree.
However, the truth is not important for US admin and its 24% ers. The thing they care about is SAFETY. And they will go miles and miles trying to justify the million or so death civilians, the destruction of two countries, the terrible damage to US credibility and the forcing of money towards the superior part of economic ladder.
Iran has to be bombed. Period.
First they were smuggling weapons into Iraq (source: a PPT presentation) and then they were building a nuke with no proof at all, just the opinions of the same people who told that Iraq had WMDs…
So, intelligence, reason and truth is not important. A democracy full of ignorant people is worthless.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:36 pmI’m serving in the military, and I really didn’t want to get deployed to Iran. This is just great news for me.
Comment by SeanC
And if Bush deployed you to Iran, he would be impeached and you would be brought up on potential war crimes for invading a country without Congressional authorization. Soldiers must not follow illegal orders.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:37 pmBush and Vice President Dick Cheney were briefed on the NIE last Wednesday, senior intelligence officials said.
Today
The White House claims it has reached an agreement with China over imposing additional UN sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Now
its all a lie, China looked fooled
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:38 pmsorry Juan C. - my comment above was directed at “Sean†instead. My bad! :)
Comment by Veritas
I just answered you thinking it was satire, which it is, but directed towards me. It perfectly fits, however to my posts.
We’re cool, Veritas. :)
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:39 pmComment by SeanC — December 3, 2007 @ 4:33 pm
###
What branch are you? Have you served in Iraq or Afghanistan? Have you taken a look at vetvoice.com? If not, take a look. It is primarily veterans, like myself, and active duty troops - some of which are in between tours and some of which are still in Iraq. Swing by sometime :)
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:39 pmThis also means that 2 weeks before the elections Bush cannot start another war to gain the war time Vote to keep the repulsives in because they need to finish the war
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:41 pmStratRat - Hate to break it to you… if the President orders a strike on Iran, then the military will do it. Don’t get mad at me over it. Yes, he might be impeached and thrown out of office at a later date - but that doesn’t stop the boots from hitting the ground. And I may have been one of those boots.
Ya know… do you guys have any perspective? Or do you just sit around, waiting for things to hate Bush over? I hate Bush just as much as everyone else, but sometimes you just gotta take a step back and say: “This is good news”. Maybe that’s hard to do, because we’re used to decades of bad news…
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:41 pmYour reading comprehension skills are as weak as ever. Please read again posting #56 and then read your mischaracterization of said posting at your posting #93.
I’ll wait for your apology.
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
I’ve been attempting to be polite to you, Exley, but the truth is that you’re a lying sack of knobs. I mischaracterized nothing but rather pointed out your constant dishonesty.
You’ll get an apology from me after you apologize for the lies you spread about Zooey some weeks back. I’ll apologize at that point for this statement: you lie constantly, repeatedly and apparently without shame. Once you’ve admitted you lied about Zooey, I’ll retract the “constantly”.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:42 pmChris L - I’m part of http://appealforredress.org/ . Serving in the Air Force, state side at the moment.
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:42 pmIt seems as if very posters here have actually read the nine-page NIE summary. Here are some interesting findings:
“We assess with high confidence that until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons.” And Iran made a “considerable effort” to acquire nuclear weapons from 1980 to 2003.
So, everybody here who said that Iran was never pursuing a nuclear weapon and never had any interest in doing so were 100% wrong, while President Bush was correct.
“We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.”
That explains why the Bush administration has correctly continued to talk tough about the Iranians and the possibility that they might one day resume their effort to develop nuclear weapons. You don’t abandon a diplomatic strategy that has been working especially when your intelligence agencies tell you they do not know Iran’s intentions re: nuclear weapons development.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:44 pmMaybe that’s hard to do, because we’re used to decades of bad news…
~Sean
Comment by SeanC
Sean, I love the way you see life. I also understand that you are not consequent with your ideas and do nothing about you and your friends being used as pawns in a corporate war. But, hey, sit back and relax.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:45 pmIt is against the law for politicians to propagandize to the citizenry.
I expect indictments for this blatant lying.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:46 pmNice attempt to (dishonestly) change the subject, Gummitch. But don’t waste our time…Why don’t you educate yourself and go and actually read the NIE Key Judgments as I have done…That way you will be able to comment somewhat intelligently on this topic.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:47 pmChris L - I’m part of http://appealforredress.org/ . Serving in the Air Force, state side at the moment.
~Sean
Comment by SeanC — December 3, 2007 @ 4:42 pm
###
Nice. I’m quite familiar with that link ;)
Where are you based? My father retired as a COL. and still lives at Barksdale, AFB
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:48 pmBecause you know me after reading a paragraph?
Heh.
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:48 pmChris L - Ft. Meade, MD, right now.
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:48 pmGummitch, that would require courage and humility. Exley, needs to look to the face of an Iraq grieving mother to know what is the meaning of dignity.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:50 pmCaptain Mantastic: “On the surface, it sounds like Bush and Co are making this a safer world. I’m interested in your take.”
Forget what it sounds like. Do you think that Bush and Co have made this a safer world? Because if you do, you’re at odds with our State Dept., the CIA and the Pentagon, all of which have published reports which state that there are more terrorists and terrorist threats in the world today than there were on Sept. 12, 2001.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:50 pm…just a fuzzy, linty mess of split hairs in here….
wow
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:50 pmBecause you know me after reading a paragraph?
~Sean
Comment by SeanC
Just what is needed to know.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:51 pmif the President orders a strike on Iran, then the military will do it. Don’t get mad at me over it.
Comment by SeanC
I am proud of you for watching our backs. I am proud of you for serving this country. However if bush orders you to invade Iran (without Congressional authorization), you will need to decide if you support the Constitution or Bush. It is that simple. I support the troops, I don’t support bush’s dictatorship.
Illegal orders are still just that - illegal. No amount of loyalty to the CIC will undo the illegality of a soldiers actions.
I think the news today is great. Very good news. I simply don’t trust the WH to do the right thing in any instance.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:52 pmThe feeling is mutual :-).
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:53 pmNice attempt to (dishonestly) change the subject, Gummitch. But don’t waste our time…Why don’t you educate yourself and go and actually read the NIE Key Judgments as I have done…That way you will be able to comment somewhat intelligently on this topic.
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Nice try, Exley, but you’ll note that I already did so and quoted them in order to refute your dishonesty.
I have to say, I doubt too many people here thinking I am wasting “our” time, your childish condescension aside.
I guess I can assume that you’re passing up the opportunity to apologize for your lies about Zooey, but I can’t say I’m surprised.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:56 pmMore from the NIE:
“We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options, or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart the program.”
So, again, we see clearly why the tough talk of the administration (and the international community) has not let up despite evidence Iran has at least temporarily halted its nuclear weapons program….The fact is that as good as the news that Iran looks to have halted its program, the NIE shows Iram was pursuing nucler weapons up untill 2003 and that we have no idea what their intentions are in this area in the future.
Thus, it clear that continued pressure (whether it be diplomatic or economic or both) is necessary to ensure that Iran lives up to its obligation under the NNP Treaty and does not develop nuclear weapons.
I would encourage everyone to follow my example and read the actual NIE Key Judgments.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:56 pm118 :Exley - who is supposed to care about your pedantic hairsplitting? What is to be gained by it? (and I know already what your stock replies are, so spare me)
Pakistan will be responsible for a nuclear event (using weapons they actually already have) long before Iran will or would or could, and then what will you recommend we do???????
That old Cold War mentality is as droll and empty, and counterproductive as it ever was.
Evolve.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:57 pmStratRat - And the Iraq war is also illegal… so… again - if Bush orders a strike, the military will strike. If I personally decide not to participate, then I will be court martialed. Is that fair? Is that right? No, not really. But that’s how it works. There were people who didn’t participate in the Iraq war because they said it was an illegal order. And those people are in jail or dishonorably discharged (unless you know of a case where this didn’t happen?).
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:58 pmGummitch, This sad attempt on your part to ingratiate yourself with another poster is most unseemly and more than a little embarrassing. Why don’t you stick with the subject matter at hand, which is the NIE? Run along and read it and then get back to us…Okay? Run along now. Scoot!
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:58 pmI never see trolls there. I never see guys like “Age of Rifles†or Exley. It just makes me wonder sometimes.
Comment by Chris L — December 3, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
I will have to check out vetvoice, thanks for the info =)
Yeah, I never see these trolls on veteran sites, as they tend to try to misdirect and disrupt “liberal” blogs with their tripe.
Try asking Exley why he supports Bushco, even though veterans, war wounded and soldiers in general are getting screwed over by this administration, deliberately.
Just look at the case of the National Guard troops that served 729 days deployed in Iraq, sent home 1 fcking day before they would qualify for benefits. Tell me that wasn’t deliberate.
Ask Exly about it, he will disappear, only to come back later with his Bush lovefest again. Totally disgusting.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:59 pmNahhh, I want Iran to have nukes just as Israel has them.
December 3rd, 2007 at 4:59 pmTomBaker,
I find it amusing (but not altogether surprising) that you consider actually reading the NIE to be “hairsplitting.” While you may be too lazy to read (or understand) the key Judgments, there are those here who have read it and can comment on it intelligently. Stop clogging up the thread until such time as you have read the Key Judgments.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:02 pmRun along and read it and then get back to us…Okay? Run along now. Scoot!
Comment by Exley
A friend’s advice, this is destroying any ability of discussion you had before.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:03 pmExley, do you think that the Bush foreign policy has made the world a safer place? Are there less loose nukes in the world today? Are there fewer terrorists? Do we have more friends; more enemies? Is our position in the world more secure than it was on January 20, 2001?
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:06 pmIMPEACH THE BASTARDS.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:07 pmI’m glad that Iran has apparently stopped working on a nuclear bomb. To be honest, I’m not convinced that they ever were working on a nuclear bomb although I sure wouldn’t have blamed them if they were.
I’m glad for Sean that he’s relieved that now he may not get “deployed to Iran”, although I don’t think he ever would have been as the plan seems/seemed to involve air strikes - possibly with nuclear weapons.
I am NOT glad that this information was supressed for a year (trying to keep people fearful for last year’s election?).
I am also NOT glad about the way our so-called leaders kept beating the war drums during that year…and are still beating them.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:07 pmExley, how about our military. Do you think that Bush policies have strengthened our military? Is it in better shape now than the military Clinton left Bush?
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:08 pmOT: that NIE (like every NIE since ‘00) was written by bush-controlled Righty spooks to (take your pick) absolve/smear some other bush-controlled Righty spooks (and to create new profit centers). Therefore, to hell with NIE’s - they didn’t work before, and they won’t now, and they’re nothing but job security and c.y.a. tools for Righty spooks.
dubbie’s pissed that all the righties in D.C. didn’t agree with the righties assigned to his “team” by Poppy. Personally, I like watching all the Righty backbiting and cannibalism. Backbiting and lying are all they’ve ever had going for them. Can’t wait to see the last two of them gnawing each other’s knees in the Devil’s own political 69.
It’s all a disgusting piece of warporn. Sad proof of our primate ancestry that so many of us still get off on warporn.
No document or report generated under this Administration should be given any credence. No law it enacts should be observed and no appointee approved, until the crime-in-progress is halted.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:10 pmGummitch, This sad attempt on your part to ingratiate yourself with another poster is most unseemly and more than a little embarrassing. Why don’t you stick with the subject matter at hand, which is the NIE? Run along and read it and then get back to us…Okay? Run along now. Scoot!
Comment by Exley — December 3, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Asked and answered, Exley. Again with the childish attempt at condescension? I don’t need to ingratiate myself with Zooey, I am simply responding to your ludicrous request for an apology from me. I don’t apologize to liars for pointing out their lies.
The subject matter is not only the NIE, but is your blatant attempts to twist the document into something that supports your hero, GWB. Therefore, by intruding yourself into the discussion you have brought your own dishonesty on to the table, like it or not.
You have revealed yourself to be nothing but an apologist for the Bushies, with all the complete lack of honesty that has come to characterize this administration.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:10 pmMantastic, I take it by your non-answer that you’d rather not address the question of whether or not Bush foreign policy has made the world safer. But, we all have come to expect sleazy, non-answers from you.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:10 pmEx - why would I take the contents of the NIE at face value??
why would anyone?
what makes it credible?
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:11 pmIt’s days like this when I miss the Daily Show the most.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:12 pmComment by SeanC — December 3, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Thanks for your service.
I served 1982 - 1991, Army, 82nd Airborne, discharged for medical after getting wounded in Desert Storm.
My dad was Air Force, last station Scott AFB, retired last year.
My younger sister served 6 years, Army, was wounded in Iraq, medically discharged and is now fighting the review board that kicked her off medical. She lost most of her liver and pancreas from an IED and developed diabetes because of the pancreas being injured.
Needless to say, none of my family is happy with this administration right now.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:13 pmIf this story is not above the fold on the front page of every American newspaper with a big headline, then we will know for sure the press has been bought off by the Bush Administration.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:15 pmCol. Jack Ripper,
“how about our military. Do you think that Bush policies have strengthened our military? Is it in better shape now than the military Clinton left Bush?”
That is not really a appropriate question. The situations are inapposite. Obviously an army that is fighting a war on two fronts (Iraq and Afghanistan) will not be in as good a shape as a military that was not fighting any war. Clinton did not face the responsibity of responding to the 9/11 attacks. Bush did. The situations and that of the military are not comparable.
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:16 pm*nod*
Thanks to you and your family.
~Sean
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:18 pm#140,
“do you think that the Bush foreign policy has made the world a safer place? Are there less loose nukes in the world today? Are there fewer terrorists? Do we have more friends; more enemies? Is our position in the world more secure than it was on January 20, 2001?”
We are getting kind of off-topic here. These are broad questions when the topic of the thread is a relatively narrow one — the NIE KJ on Iran’s nuclear weapons programs. However, I will say I do indeed believe we are safer today than in Jan. 20, 2001 — Safer, but still not safe.
As for loose nukes, I have no idea. I certainly hope there are less loose nukes but I don’t know
December 3rd, 2007 at 5:20 pmWhat happened in 2003, exactly? I don’t think it was diplomacy - Iran tried diplomacy and we told them to go shove it: