If that's directed at me, I'm one that believes we will find some WMD. I'm not certain we'll find new programs of any magnitude, but I haven't ruled it out.
I can also see the propaganda along the way as well.
If they don´t find any WoMD I will be very disappointed by the CIA.
I was under the impression that the CIA was against a war and didn't necessarily believe in the WMD threat in the first place. From what I've read it's the Bush administration misrepresenting CIA intelligence to essentially fabricate a case for war rather than the CIA producing (legitimately or not) the evidence necessary to support the need for a war.
I was under the impression that the CIA was against a war and didn't necessarily believe in the WMD threat in the first place. From what I've read it's the Bush administration misrepresenting CIA intelligence to essentially fabricate a case for war rather than the CIA producing (legitimately or not) the evidence necessary to support the need for a war.
Is the CIA more to blame than I suppose?
What I meant was if evidence of WoMD aren´t found the least they can do is to produce it.
Sorry. I am in a child-like mode today. Just spewing random sentences out, with almost no connection to the real world.
Comments
Originally posted by Anders the White
Well the germans did lose the war so its fair game...
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Right, propoganda. Keep shifting the argument...
If that's directed at me, I'm one that believes we will find some WMD. I'm not certain we'll find new programs of any magnitude, but I haven't ruled it out.
I can also see the propaganda along the way as well.
Originally posted by Anders the White
If they don´t find any WoMD I will be very disappointed by the CIA.
I was under the impression that the CIA was against a war and didn't necessarily believe in the WMD threat in the first place. From what I've read it's the Bush administration misrepresenting CIA intelligence to essentially fabricate a case for war rather than the CIA producing (legitimately or not) the evidence necessary to support the need for a war.
Is the CIA more to blame than I suppose?
Originally posted by bunge
I was under the impression that the CIA was against a war and didn't necessarily believe in the WMD threat in the first place. From what I've read it's the Bush administration misrepresenting CIA intelligence to essentially fabricate a case for war rather than the CIA producing (legitimately or not) the evidence necessary to support the need for a war.
Is the CIA more to blame than I suppose?
What I meant was if evidence of WoMD aren´t found the least they can do is to produce it.
Sorry. I am in a child-like mode today. Just spewing random sentences out, with almost no connection to the real world.
Originally posted by Anders the White
What I meant was if evidence of WoMD aren´t found the least they can do is to produce it.
Sorry. I am in a child-like mode today. Just spewing random sentences out, with almost no connection to the real world.
Whoops. Sorry for taking you seriously.