Downing Street Memo

**sean** · 06-20-2005

The point behind the Downing Street memo is that the President was determined to go to war with Iraq BEFORE that evidence was given to him.

**Govtcheez** · 06-20-2005

Besides, Bush has never had a problem ignoring evidence if it doesn't suit him (see the numerous environmental reports that have had conclusions twisted or outright changed).

edit: Also, I expect the President to look into something like that further before committing all these troops to it. Why were so few othe countries convinced that the evidence was good? Maybe we should have looked to them instead?

**golfinguy4** · 06-20-2005

Originally Posted by Glirk Dient

When you are given a piece of paper that says Iraq has WMDs and has 50 pages of evidence, why would he say Nah, theres no way...especially when theres so much evidence its almost a joke to say he doesn't. Of course he would believe them telling him there is for certain WMDs in Iraq. To go to war on this evidence isn't Bush's fault but the people who came up with false evidence. It is their job to make sure what they are telling the president is 100% correct.

Hate to burst your bubble, but 50 pages is almost nothing when it comes to making a decision of that magnitude.

**sean** · 06-20-2005

Why were so few othe countries convinced that the evidence was good? Maybe we should have looked to them instead?

I'm remind of the quote, "The last time the French asked for more proof, it ended up marching into Paris under German flag".

**Govtcheez** · 06-20-2005

oh hey good rebuttal

**sean** · 06-20-2005

And shouldn't you be working?

**pianorain** · 06-20-2005

Originally Posted by sean_mackrory

And shouldn't you be working?

Shouldn't you be gone?

Originally Posted by sean_mackrory

Well we're having our floors redone with wood, and I'm not gonna have much access to the PC for a week, so this is probably my last post for a while (govt - you better not forget that letter!) - so here's my final two cents:

**sean** · 06-20-2005

oh hey good rebuttal

Well it's a half day at work and I don't have to be there until 1, and as it turns out they're not going to tent-off the first floor until Wednesday.

**Govtcheez** · 06-20-2005

Originally Posted by sean_mackrory

And shouldn't you be working?

shhh

**nvoigt** · 06-20-2005

In the weeks before the imminent invasion - hundreds of trucks were seen leaving for Jordan.

Obviously Bush doesn't know, because last thing I heard, Jordan is still a sovereign state

**Govtcheez** · 06-20-2005

Both of those sources are biased enough that they can be essentially dismissed out of hand, sean. The UN whining page complains about assignments of countries to Council posts, as well as complaining about a non-involvement of the UN in various things around the world. If I remember correctly, we didn't exactly jump at the chance to help those particular places, either. The second decides that Saddam really did have all those weapons based on some engines being found that could be used in rockets. This is very similar to the Bush claim about the stainless steel rods found earlier.

**Glirk Dient** · 06-20-2005

Here is a google search that has a few more articles on WMD equipment being removed.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

When I said 50...I made that up. Each piece of evidence may have had that many pages attached to it, I'm just saying is there is a whole lot of evidence and things that point to WMDs. This is just like the OJ Trial, all of the evidence is there but people still claim he is innocent.

There is too much evidence and reason for me to think he didn't have WMDs, gassing his own people, nearby countries being given weapons they can't produce on their own, equipment being removed. He had the means to make them and the motive, and he also had the means to hide every shred of evidence.

**Govtcheez** · 06-20-2005

OK thanks I couldn't use google on my own. Show me a credible source out of that mess. I'm not going to do your research for you.

> When I said 50...I made that up.

Oh no ..........?

> This is just like the OJ Trial, all of the evidence is there but people still claim he is innocent.

It's sure a good thing that we got rid of that whole "jury" thing and let Glirk Dient decide the fate of everyone.

> nearby countries being given weapons they can't produce on their own

Proof, please.

**Glirk Dient** · 06-20-2005

I was going to give a list of sites showing that, but there were so many it was more efficient to post the google search. Well, here is your list.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/eur...ear_equipment/
http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/oct20...main/main8.htm
http://new-frontiers.org/newsarchive...lay.aspx?n=494
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...raqnuke15.html
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...15nuclear.html

Chemical weapons in Jordan
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4771882/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...jordan.terror/
http://www.donaldscrankshaw.com/posts/1083014501.shtml

Here is an interesting article.
http://projects.sipri.se/cbw/researc...heet-1984.html

It talks about how Iraq used mustard gas, how Iraq developed the ability to create WMDs on its own and how well they hide it.

This article says that Iraq did not come up with sufficient evidence that it destoryed all of its WMD stockpile.
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/98042705_npo.html

Here is a pre invasion article that says Iraq has unaccounted stockpile and possibly the ability to quickly create WMDs
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/m.../iraq.weapons/

Here is a good read to refute the downing street memo
http://allthingsconservative.typepad...emoshmemo.html

**Govtcheez** · 06-20-2005

http://www.boston.com/news/world/eu...lear_equipment/
http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/oct2.../main/main8.htm
http://new-frontiers.org/newsarchiv...play.aspx?n=494
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht...iraqnuke15.html
http://www.signonsandiego.com/union...n15nuclear.html

That's the same AP article 5 times. Also, considering the theft occured after our invasion it's more a testament to our incompetence than anything else.

Chemical weapons in Jordan
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4771882/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast.../jordan.terror/
http://www.donaldscrankshaw.com/posts/1083014501.shtml

None of these have anything to do with Iraq, except tangentially. I don't think it's news to anyone that Jordan has terrorists in it.

This article says that Iraq did not come up with sufficient evidence that it destoryed all of its WMD stockpile.

That article from 5 years before the invasion?

Here is a pre invasion article that says Iraq has unaccounted stockpile and possibly the ability to quickly create WMDs

So, that article was wrong. What's your point?

Here is a good read to refute the downing street memo

Wow, what an awesome source! Maybe I should start linking you to some DemocraticUnderground bloggers and we could have a real party!