1) Iraq attempting to buy uranium in Africa2) Iraq buying aluminum tubes to enrich uranium3) Iraq had mobile chemical weapons labs to evade detection4) Iraq was involved in the attack on 9/11Did the Bush admin argue these points pre-invasion?Did the Bush admin scape goat US intel agencies who warned them that these claims had little or no merit?
You're better than this, Chi Guy: Points 1, 2 and 3; We don't really know what Bush did nor didn't have in terms of intelligence on IraqThe very nature of intelligence (bits and pieces here and there; very difficult to get anything conclusive) made it difficult to state with 100% certainty whether Iraq had WMD's or notTHAT IS THE REASON THAT UNFETTERED INSPECTIONS FOR WMD WAS IN THE TREATY THAT ENDED GULF WAR I IN THE FIRST PLACEOnce Saddam refused to allow 100% unfettered access, he was in violation of the treatyTherefore, prudence demanded that we act to make sure that he was not resuming his WMD programIf you want to argue that there may have been better ways to deal with this (applying leverage or Iraq's allies, containment, etc) I can understand thatHowever, to imply that Bush lied about everything and this action was completely unjustified is wrongAs far as point 4 is concerned, if I recall correctly, the only thing the administration stated was that there was contact between Saddam and agents of al-QaedaI don't recall the administration ever making the link between Iraq and 9/11.
