So was WMD in Iraq

[jiacinto]

I read the thread about Debka. If there was WMD in Iraq doesn't that hurt us?

[Walt Starr]

1. If you believe Debka, Batboy has a bridge to sell you

Seriously, I take the Debka article as nearly proof positive there are no WMDs.

[Hokie]

6. Agreed

If it runs on Debka you can be sure it is not true. I have never seen any site, other than the RNC, with as poor a track record for being correct.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

2. What is Debka?

I've never heard of it.

[JohnyCanuck]

8. It's an Israeli web site

Specializing in intelligence matters with an emphasis on the Middle East. There is some speculation that it is has connections to the Mossad or at the very least has a pro-Israel axe to grind so cannot be relied on to be entirely objective when reporting on issues which involve the Arab/Israeli conflicts.

www.debka.com

[searchingforlight]

3. I agree. We should believe only those sources that don't have

and ax to grind.

[Kellanved]

4. No

Killing thousands of civilians, hundreds of US soldiers and spending billions of US$ for an end constantly downgraded (WMD in 45 minutes -> WMD -> WMD program -> ...) is IMHO not justifiable.
Especially as I can't see why the inspectors weren't allowed to continue their (obviosly not completely unsuccessful) job.

And the performance hasn't improved since may 1st.

[kainah]

5. It is clear that the UN weapons inspectors

could have done exactly what we have succeeded in doing ... and therefore, whether or not WMD are eventually found, it is also clear that there was no reason for the escalation of hostilities that * brought us with his precedent-setting preemptive war.

[sandnsea]

7. Did Bush tell lies or not?

That's the issue to me. They were supposed to KNOW why we needed to go to war, not make shit up. Stumbling across something now is not the same as saying here's the piece of intelligence, here's the WMD that matches that piece of intelligence.

It'll hurt though, because Fox will say what they will say and that'll become the truth.