Someone asked why Bush didn't plant WMDs. Its because they are watching

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4392857&mesg_id=4392857

Ok - why didn't * lie about WMD in Iraq like many thought he would?
Back in the early days of the iraq war start I remember seeing many people postulate that * would plant WMD, find them, then justify his war.

Why has this not happened? It would not have been too hard to do so - whether nuclear or biological. So I am left wondering why he has not planted them to find over this time?

Is he just an idiot, a dupe, or was there really bad intel (and I would lean towards the latter as both Clinton and Gore felt there were WMD at the time)?

Any ideas?


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8080407/

U.N.: Weapons equipment missing in Iraq

UNITED NATIONS - U.N. satellite imagery experts have determined that material that could be used to make biological or chemical weapons and banned long-range missiles has been removed from 109 sites in Iraq, U.N. weapons inspectors said in a report obtained Thursday.

U.N. inspectors have been blocked from returning to Iraq since the U.S.-led war in 2003 so they have been using satellite photos to see what happened to the sites that were subject to U.N. monitoring because their equipment had both civilian and military uses. snip

He said imagery analysts have identified 109 sites that have been emptied of equipment to varying degrees, up from 90 reported in March.

The report also provided much more detail about the percentage of items no longer at the places where U.N. inspectors monitored them.

From the imagery analysis, Perricos said analysts at the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission which he heads have concluded that biological sites were less damaged than chemical and missile sites.

[Fridays Child]

1. It would have required the involvement of too many people.

It's not likely that they could get away with it.

[babylonsister]

2. I don't know about that; look at the stolen election. nt

[electron_blue]

4. He didn't need to

How has the lack of WMD's impeded his political agenda or 'getting on with his life"?

[babylonsister]

7. Getting on with his life? Insert 'toon here:

[pretzel4gore]

3. mygod, iraq's a 3rd world country!

and it's been monkeyed with since the time of lawrence arabia, for chrissake. there was no threat from iraq; she was too small, too weak and just too old fashioned to pose a threat to amerka; who murdered jfk (and got away with it?)?...i think that is the real threat; hell we're going to end up with the nazipoos blowing up salt lake city (whatever) with a 15 megaton nuke if them criminal bastards ever feel they need to really be tough in order to avert the danger of being caught.
besides, saddam was a cia agent the whole time

[brindis_desala]

5. simple: a- because the European press would insist on proof and

the sources could be traced.
b- because once you've found them- mission accomplished. No more bases.

[ComerPerro]

6. Here's how to completely debunk the "bad intel" myth

If the CIA screwed up so badly, and none of this is Bush's fault, then why the hell did Bush give George Tenet a medal?

Is it their official policy to reward failure?

[A Simple Game]

8. Is it their official policy to reward failure?

Why, yes it seems so.

[neebob]

9. Um, because he and his advisors are sociopaths

with no fear of consequences, who know that a media campaign linking the war to 9/11 will get more than enough idiots to support it without having to plant WMDs, if they even considered it in the first place? That would be my guess.