To justify the war with Iraq the administration had three main talking points
1. That Iraq was actively developing "Weapons of Mass Destruction" to include nuclear ones.
2. That it had a "realtionship" with Al Quaeda
3. The "threat" of Saddam providing terrorists with WMDs.
President Bush said, "The Iraqi regime ...possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. It has given shelter and support to terrorism.... The danger is already significant, and it grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today —and we do—does it make any sense for the world to wait...for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud?"
"The British government," Bush said, "has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Powell did not hedge or qualify his case. "My colleagues," he said, "every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."
"Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent,"
Iraq "retains a covert force of up to a few dozen Scud-variant ballistic missiles,"
"has illegally imported 380 SA-2 rocket engines."
"wherewithal to develop smallpox."
"warheads containing biological warfare agent...hidden in large groves of palm trees"
The factory with thousands of centrifuges intended to produce fissionable material for atomic bombs with the telltale aluminum tubes?
"biological weapons factories on wheels," adding that "we know that Iraq has at least seven of these...factories."
"hundreds of documents signed by Iraqi scientists putting them on notice that death would be the punishment for anyone who talked"
All these were claims made in the administrations case.......
The administration put Mr. Kay in charge of finding all this stuff and others. He couldnt say whether the vast majority of it existed or not, just that it could be a possibility.
Mr. Bush has even admitted the intelligence was flawed and errors were made.
We carry a concealed weapon because of possibilities, do we take it out and shoot someone just because they have the possibility of attacking us?
I am for a preemption doctrine when it comes to terrorism. That means getting you intel side of the house in order. I am not so sure that we have even accomplished that task yet. Before we put peoples lives on the line for possibilities.
