Reply #6: Check out Wikipedia. Great summary. [View All]

[chalky]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo

They even zero in on the most damning parts of the memo, including:

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.
The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.
The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change."

Thus showing:
A) They were already attacking Iraq before the discussions even began.
B)The WMD case they eventually shoved down our throat was bogus. Not based on faulty intel, as the freepers are fond of saying--THERE WAS. NO. INTEL.
C)We had no legal basis for attacking Iraq.