Congressional hearings

The senate select committee on intelligence is going to hold hearings on the accuracy to the bush administrations prewar claims on iraq’s WMD.
Does anyone else think this is a waste of time? I think it is becoming more and more obvious that the bush admin. has at the very least exaggerated about iraq’s WMD’s or probably worse - they lied.
Yes, I know that is hard for most people to swallow but it isn’t the first time a president has played loose with the facts in order to justify u.s. intervention.
Most congessmen and senators voted for this invasion so are we now supposed to believe that they will be impartial during these hearings? If bush lied will they not also be culpable?
I think the whole notion of these hearings are ridiculous. Anyone agree?

The WMD question is a combination of two things: possible inacccuracy of CIA intel; and the strong probability that they moved the weapons to Syria.

If Bush knew they would not find weapons…he would not have said they were there…he would have have known he would have egg on his face and that his credibility was crap. Say what you will about his presidency…but the man and his administration aren’t that stupid.

No, I do not think that hearings are a waste of time. I personally think they should be open to the public.

I want to know why Clinton lying about blowjobs is an impeachable offense, but Bush lying to Congress and the American people about the urgent need for war is not?

Also, there is some evidence that the CIA told the Bush administration that the evidence of WMD was sketchy, yet Rumsfeld decided to portray the situation in the worst possible light. For example, it was known by the CIA that that document saying that Iraq had purchased enriched uranium was a forgery. Yet later, Bush made a big deal about it in his state of the union address.

Whether Bush knowingly lied, or was simply misled by his advisors, either way it shows piss-poor stewardship as the commander in chief.

Now we’ve spent 80 to 100 billion dollars on the intial war, and will pay an unknown amount keeping those troops there (anyone know what we pay per month? It’s astronomical.)

Does anyone know what our exit strategy for Iraq is? Please don’t tell me “we stay there until we get the job done”.

Also, why is the Bush administration dragging it’s feet on the 9-11 investigation? It has taken 1.5 years after the fact to set up an investigation, and they are just getting started. The Bush white house has also tried to prevent access to government documents, to the very committee that is responsible for investigating. Only 12 million dollars has been allocated to investigate.

On the other hand, after the Challenger blew up recently, an investigation was launched, 90 MINUTES after the event, and 50 million dollars was allocated.

Things that make you go “Hmmm”.

Lumpy: even if the hearings were televised (like Iran-Contra) we would never get to hear the most damaging parts. They would just go behind closed doors. That is why they are a waste of time.
It’s funny how Rush Limbaugh would rant on a daily basis about Clinton’s non-exit stratedgy during thr Kosovo debacle but hasn’t been saying squat about the iraq situation. Come to think of it that man makes me sick. Anyone who’s spent most of their professional life purposely misleading people is absolutely dispicable.
I do share your desire to find the truth but do not look to the politicians for this because they are also implicated.
These hearings are nothing more than window dressing for public consumption. Do not be fooled.

PtrDr: I find it hard to believe that the weapons were moved to Syria without us knowing about it. The sad truth is that he most likely only had a very limited amount of chem/bio material. Even if evidence does turn up two questions need to be asked. Did the weapons exist in sufficent amount to pose an actual threat to the U.S.? The fact that he didn’t use these weapons even as his regime was about to fall is a strong suggestion he did not. And even if he did have such weapons would he have used them against the U.S. if we were not planning an attack?
History is repleat with u.s. leaders lying to the people in order to whip us into a frenzy for war.
A few examples:
The gulf of tonkin incident in 1964.
In 1898 the u.s.s. maine blew up off the coast of cuba. Most historians beleive it to be a mistake but congress used it as a rally cry “remember the maine”.
In 1990 bushie sr. said that iraq was pulling babies off their incubators. A total fabrication by a well paid pr firm.
There is also a good deal of evidence to suggest that FDR was given information making him aware that japan was planning an attack on pearl harbor but did nothing about it.
Politicians lie on a daily basis to the public that is why I find it so hard that people actually believe and defend them as much as they do.

Zeppelin…I agree that leaders have lied in the past and will continue to do so. The thing with the weapons is…he continued to defy UN resolution 1441 which explicitly demanded an accounting of the weapons that was DOCUMENTED that he had! Now, if he got rid or destroyed them…he should have accounted for that in the report. His lack of giving that information(if it is true…) is stupid. If he did destroy them…why not just account for them on paper as such? They had to take his noncompliance as a statement that he STILL did indeed have them. Just ask Hans Blix…

Don

PtrDR: The arguement over violations of the u.n. resolutions is still not sufficient reason to invade a country. The u.s. has gone against the wishes of the u.n. and so has russia but I don’t see anyone talking about those defiances. If you are big and strong then you can get away with what you want but if you are weak like iraq you ahve to abide by rules.
Why doesn’t the u.n. pass a resolution stating that iran stop pursuing nuclear weapons or else we will invade. Then once they break said resolution we can attack. According to you that would be right. I don’t see it that way.
I just can’t see how this invasion is morally valid. When bush said we have to bring to justice the perpetrators of 9/11 what did he mean?
According to Marc Herold (econ.proff at Uni.of New Hampshire) a very conservative estimate on civilian deaths in afghanastan and iraq are 6,000. That is twice as many as those who died on 9/11. Is this what bush calls justice? If so it is a gross mockery of the word itself.

lumpy and zepplin,

Are you two nitwits still at it? I was thinking that you two need to be forced to wear United States clothing for 365 days a year row. You need to spend your time using things that were invented in the United States. You need to listen to music from the United States. You need to watch news and other television shows from the United States.

Wait, you already do all of these things. I’ll have to think of something else.

Maybe you two ought to just capitulate. Leave the whole, fighting for freedom thing to us.

Since your countries are small and weak, you should probably consider that your voices don’t mean a hell of a lot to us. It might be wise to for you to discontinue your constant harping. You know the old saying, “If you can’t beat us, join us.”

The hearings are an absolute farce. If you choose to remember, Bush presented all the intelligence that they had to Congress, and Congress agreed with the president that an invasion was necessary. They had already seen the intelligence reports, now they want to cover their asses so they look good come election time.

I guess in order to be a “Good Guy” you have to condone the president of the US lying to Congress and to the citizens of the US.

PtrDR has a good point concerning if the Bush admin’s credibility issue.

Bush’s main concern is looking good coming into the next election, so why would they knowingly do something that would endanger it?

Perhaps the buck will be passed on to the CIA, but that’d be another dumb move that’d bite them in the ass down the line.

Maybe they knew Hussein had something (but not much of anything), and its been gotten rid of. Who knows…

All I know is that the “imminent threat” garbage and the Al-Quaid link stuff was a load of crap delivered in order to accomplish other goals.

But as TC said, perhaps we’re just tiny bio-organisms floating thru life so I’m going swimming

To U.s.: Ahhh… I knew it wouldn’t be long before you crawled out of your cave.
Hmmm… capitulate and leave the freedom thing to you. How could I do that when you have no idea what freedom is?
Tell me, why do you think this is a morally valid war?
And by the way whay country do you think I’m from?