--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tenet's speech about it, in which he makes very clear the > difference between > having programs and intensions v. actually having WMDs (as well as > ordinary weapons v. WMDs), including the crystal-clear > statement, "They never said > there was an 'imminent' threat." : > http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/dci020504.html > > I don't see how any reasonable person, after reading these > documents, could conclude that war on Iraq was justified by an > immediate or imminent threat. > But that's what we were told by the consumers of this intelligence.
Nick, I asked a very specific question - "Other than Scott Ritter (last in Iraq in 1998), did any of the intelligence services actually conclude that Iraq had no WMD stockpiles or programs before the war?" You answered in the affirmative, and referred me to the National Intelligence Estimate as posted at GW University - an estimate entitled, quote, "Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction." In my quick look-over of it, I see no evidence that the National Intelligence Estimate you cite answers my above question in the affirmative. Indeed, the very title of the report answers my question in the negative. Admittedly, you have also referred to a quote from George Tenet, cited above. This quote, however, refers to whether or not those weapons consitute an "imminent threat." As I noted earlier, there is a difference between the *factual* question of whether the weapons existed and the *political* question of what sort of threat those weapons actually pose, and what, if anything should be done about that threat. While the intelligence agencies may have had their opinions on these political questions, the ultimate constitutional responsibility for making political decision resides with the politicians themselves. As Dan Minette said "Not stating that there was an imminent threat is not the same as stating that there is not an imminent threat." I didn't see an out-and-out statement that "Iraq was not an imminent threat" in the report, and if such a statement does not exist, I would say that this precisely because of this very delineation in responsibilities. I might also add, that you are putting an awful lot of faith in intelligence services that did not recognize that Saddam Hussein was two years away from a nuclear bomb in 1991, did not recognize that India and Pakistan were about to go public as nuclear powers in the mid-90's, that did not realize that the DPRK was taking our bribes and building nuclear weapons anyways in the mid-90's, and did not realize that Iran had been engaging in all sorts of nuclear bomb- making activities for years. JDG _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
