| > What did they know that Colin Powell did not? Rhetorical question? WRT Iraq, it was public knowledge that: a) Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, indeed Iraq and al Qaeda were idealogical opponents. b) Iraq had no "weapons of mass destruction"; cite Hans Blix, others. c) Iraqi leader Hussein had completely capitulated, meaning GWB had effectively won without firing a single shot. d) Bush Admin and their sources were lying and didn't care that every one knew they were lying. WRT Afghanistan, I don't readily recall what intelligence failures were publicly known at the time. Complicity of Pakistan's ISI. Allowing bin Laden to escape. The tar pit of dealing with Taliban, the misc war lords of the Northern Alliance. Many objected to Bush Admin's focus on Iraq at the expense of the Afghanistan effort. Many more objected to Bush Admin's violation of the Powell Doctrine, in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Many pointed out the advocates for invading Iraq, mostly the neo-cons (aka chickenhawks), simply wanted war, regime change, and so forth. They'd said as much for over a decade. They seized the crisis of 9/11 to enact their plans. It was all very audacious and unapologetic. |
I think that overstates the case. There was no good proof they did have those weapons, and a lot of stuff was fabricated or blown out of proportion to support their having them, but there was also a lot of reason to suspect they had them (including that we/our allies had supplied them to Saddam the past!...plus prior use against the Kurds and Shia). I think the consensus opinion now is that Saddam was trying to make others (especially within Iraq) believe he had a viable WMD capability, but that he didn't have an active program at the time of invasion.