Viewing Thread:
"Ok, hear me out."

Dr Kelly apparently comitting suicide.
The revelations at the Hutton inquiry that he told a friend should Iraq be invaded, he fully expected to "be found dead in the woods".
Why? Because he had promised prominent Iraqi officials that if they co-operated with UN inspectors, there would be no war.
But it happened anyway.
And Iraqis are extremely big on honour and loyalty.

So what if Dr Kelly *was* murdered. But why immediately suspect the MOD?
Is it not possible that Iraqi exiles/hardcore supporters of Hussein over here (the same ones we're drafting all this legislation for our protection over), would have arranged it?

I'm just mulling this one over.
Kelly promises Iraq no war if co-operate with UN
They do so.
War anyway.
Kelly's name leaked
Kelly turns up "dead in the woods", as he predicted.

What I do find strange about it all is that the majority (at least on this board) seem to have quite extreme views on the subject. It seems to be either that there are WMD and that the government is totally right or that there are no WMD and the government is lying and theres this whole evil conspiracy type thing going on. There doesn't seem to be much room for possibilities like, the intelligence was just plain wrong or the intelligence was interpreted wrongly by the government. This is especially true when applied to the US. Very few suggest they made a mistake and plain got it wrong, it always has to be about money/oil etc..
Which is even stranger considering the general ridicule that Bush & co receive which largely suggests that are incapable of tying their own shoe laces, nevermind making judgements about international affairs.

Blank wrote:
> Leaving behind the fact that no evidence has been found of WMD, if
> they could have used weapons against us in 20/45 minutes, they would
> have. Why not? If you put yourself in Saddam's shoes it looks a lot
> better than losing power and face.


Maybe he felt he had a better chance fighting a guerilla campaign - send most of his army to blend in with the civilians, and pick off Americans slowly, until the ongoing deaths caused America to lose the political will to continue occupation of Iraq. Then he could seize power again.

No doubt better odds than fighting the Americans head to head.

Leaving behind the fact that no evidence has been found of WMD, if they could have used weapons against us in 20/45 minutes, they would have. Why not? If you put yourself in Saddam's shoes it looks a lot better than losing power and face. So the comeback to this is...what? That they could never hit us with WMD, but only their neighbours because the weapons weren't powerful enough? Well why didn't we say so then? Why didn't we go into Iraq from these countries in order to protect them? I could understand if they said this after attacks, once they'd built up public support, but they haven't.

Whichever way you look at it the whole thing's a sham. But the sad thing is, no matter how many people gradually come to realise this over time, I don't believe the people responsible will be held as such. They're still free to do this again to tomorrow if they wanted, and they'd get away with it again.

Oh this enquiry will uncover precisely zero and have zero effect on anything.
If anyone really believes that action will be taken, then I have some magic beans for them to buy.

20 mins/45 mins etc etc.
The fact remains that zero evidence has been discovered, Hussein remains at large and more soldiers have been killed since hostilities ended in May than during the entire conflict...oh, but that doesn't count the "More of 'Our Boys' killed by friendly fire than enemy aggression".

No WOMD found, no interim government, the USA trying to extricate itself and involve the UN - previously dismissed by Rumsfeld et al as "useless" (echoed by Bell here).
All we have is a country operating like The Wild West, an innocent man dead, yet more lies and deceit from Blair and his cronies and more round-and-round discussions here and there.

Belldandy wrote:

>
> On another note, evidence is now available showing that the 45 min
> claim was in fact sexed DOWN by Number 10, officials in the MOD knew
> intel showed it to be 20 mins.


Umm...but doesn't the fact that nothing has yet been found after a few months searching kinda indicate that whether the claim was 20 or 45, it was still an absolute pile of uncorroborated nadgers?

Also, although I think Gilligan is going to be screwed, isn't anyone in the tiniest bit worried that absolutely no-one from government appears to be taking responsibility for anything that happened that lies within the scope of this enquiry? Our whole government appear to be unaccountable for their actions. Is no-one else a little scared by that?

Got it.

Belldandy wrote:
> What's hand to eye co-ordination Blank ? :P

You what? I don't understand that jibe at all to be honest.

Belldandy wrote:
> No, we know why we went to war.

We know why we were told we had to go to war. It was a bunch of stuff about being 45 minutes away from an Iraqi chemical attack with chemical weapons that no one has found. And a terrifying nuclear program built around some imaginary uranium. We still don't know why we were fed these lies/mistakes as the gospel truth. Who were the incompetents who came up with this crap, and why were the politicians so eager to accept it? Was it because they had already made up their minds and that actual evidence got in the way of fighting evil-doers? These are different issues from why Dr Kelly died and they should get their own inquiry.

But if the government know people are stupid and intentionally present stuff in a misleading manner to lead them to a desired belief then they don't exactly walk away with clean hands either.


Is a con-man taking old pensioners' money with 'time-share' offers practicing a moral career?

But it's people's fault if they misinterpret evidence, not the government's ! If people are stupid then it is their own fault !