Log in

View Full Version : New Downing Street Memo comes to light


scandium
03-27-06, 06:36 AM
The details should suprprise nobody, but then you never know. Plus its one thing to have speculated on it at the time, but without any proof, and another to have something come to light later proving what you'd suspected all along. The article (apologies for the long URL):
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/europe/27memo.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1143435600&en=b6593aee0e01d384&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=login

Some quotes:

"Bush Was Set on Path to War, Memo by British Adviser Says

LONDON — In the weeks before the United States-led invasion of Iraq, as the United States and Britain pressed for a second United Nations resolution condemning Iraq, President Bush's public ultimatum to Saddam Hussein was blunt: Disarm or face war.

But behind closed doors, the president was certain that war was inevitable. During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons, said a confidential memo about the meeting written by Mr. Blair's top foreign policy adviser and reviewed by The New York Times.


[snip]

The memo indicates the two leaders envisioned a quick victory and a transition to a new Iraqi government that would be complicated, but manageable. Mr. Bush predicted that it was "unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups." Mr. Blair agreed with that assessment.

The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Mr. Hussein"

Its amusing to contrast what they were saying behind closed doors (essentially that the invasion was inevitable) with what they were saying publicly (that no decision had been made and that their only goal was for Iraq to comply with UN resolutions and disarm). Small wonder they made sure inspections were brought to an end before being concluded so that they could begin the invasion. I only wonder at how many can still believe that WMD were ever anything more than a pretext, or how Bush supporters rationalize the fact that he was essentially lying to the American people throughout this period, saying one thing publicly and quite another privately.

The third quoted paragraph also shows their costly simple minded optimism. How these two continue to remain in power is amazing.

micky1up
03-27-06, 05:12 PM
well he didnt need a second resolution did he and if you think wmd's where not there your a bigger fool than i thought

how many ira arms cahes did the uk forces find in ireland in decades of conflict ? answer not many and iraq is 100 times bigger than ireland

Skybird
03-27-06, 05:27 PM
well he didnt need a second resolution did he and if you think wmd's where not there your a bigger fool than i thought

how many ira arms cahes did the uk forces find in ireland in decades of conflict ? answer not many and iraq is 100 times bigger than ireland
Standard rethoric. Your team claimed there are WMD (and some real funny lies and follies as well, I just think of the link between Al Quaeda and Saddam, or the 30 minute missile warning-memo, or the uran-Niger-deal, or the mobile biological weapon laboratories. :lol: )It's your responsebiltiy to proove that claim if you have raised it - not that of those telling you in advance that that claim was queer.

micky1up
03-27-06, 05:44 PM
place a bit of logic on it sky for instance your a dictator of a old nation with asperations of greater thing's what do you do to safeguard your position well first build and army , then oh and airforce , then oh a nuclear weapon but how do i do that well bing! france apears in the shape of guess who my old friend chirac with the odd nuclear reactor but oh dear the nation not far from you takes it out on switch on day boohoo then oops lets invade iran because i want the land but oh no iran fights back never mind i gas em oops and some of my own troops and civilains aswell oops that fails but ive gone broke no cash i know i owe a small nation just south of me a **** load o cash from the war i invaded them then oops get my arse kicked by the satan and the uk oops then rebelion i have to kill loads of my own people ok ive done that before no problem then i get invaded then arested a few years later

CAN A MAN BE RATED AS A WEAPON OF MASS DISTRUCTION HOW MANY BODIES DO U NEED TO SEE TO BE CONVICED THAT ACTION NEEDED TO BE TAKEN SKY 1, 2, 5MILLION

STEED
03-27-06, 05:46 PM
:zzz:

Skybird
03-27-06, 05:50 PM
Micky, you better call for killing all mankind preemptively. Then you will be saved.

I reject your mental experiments here. I refer to the words and "evidences" and "facts" your CIC said he had in hand. What you do now is just an attempt to distract from that. As often before. :zzz:

A reason given before a war is a reason. A reason given after a war is a foul excuse. the reasons beeing given before were fakes. the reason you give now are foul excuses.

micky1up
03-27-06, 05:59 PM
we dont need to give excuses afterall you live under the protection that we in the pro-active nations military provide i rather you just said thx and went about your buisness opinions are like *******s evryone has em but as i can see not everyone likes to hear them doulble so if its in conflict with the great skybird fountain of all knowlage when you wake up from this politically correct and self rightious slumber and see the threat i will gladly accept your humble appologies

Skybird
03-27-06, 06:30 PM
:zzz:

micky1up
03-27-06, 06:32 PM
well what do you expect from a pig nought but a grunt

scandium
03-28-06, 12:18 AM
well he didnt need a second resolution did he and if you think wmd's where not there your a bigger fool than i thought

how many ira arms cahes did the uk forces find in ireland in decades of conflict ? answer not many and iraq is 100 times bigger than ireland

I refer your attention to this paragraph from the second page (which has the most meat on it):

"At their meeting, Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair candidly expressed their doubts that chemical, biological or nuclear weapons would be found in Iraq in the coming weeks, the memo said. The president spoke as if an invasion was unavoidable. The two leaders discussed a timetable for the war, details of the military campaign and plans for the aftermath of the war."

So they were both candid in their doubts that any WMD would be found and Bush felt an invasion was "unavoidable." This was only 6 weeks after inspections had begun. Is it possible they doubted any WMD would be found because neither really believed that Iraq, disarmed, embargoed and routinely bombed since the Gulf War, actually possessed any? Could this be why Bush thought an invasion unavoidable and put an end to inspections before they were finished to launch one?

As to the points you raised later, the rationale for going to war was that Saddam possessed WMD, not that he was one. There's a bit of a difference.

Lastly for someone who doesn't need to give excuses you're doing a fine job of trying to. :lol: