Downing Street MemoS
Topic: Now there are 8!
A little complaining seems to have gone a long way. A few weeks ago NO ONE has heard about this Downing Street Memo thing and I was all pissed that here was something. Since then I have been expecting it to surge a little and then quickly fade out of sight. Especially since we saw Bush and Blair swat these things away at a press conference and all. Did it?

Thankfully, not at all. Now it's been in most major media outlets, more people now have at least heard about it AND there was an unofficial hearing on Congress Thursday. Good start. How can it get any bigger? Why by adding MORE memos into the mix!

Chicago Tribune:

Memos Show British Concern Over Iraq Plans

By THOMAS WAGNER
Associated Press Writer
Published June 18, 2005, 11:04 AM CDT

LONDON -- When Prime Minister Tony Blair's chief foreign policy adviser dined with Condoleezza Rice six months after Sept. 11, the then-U.S. national security adviser didn't want to discuss Osama bin Laden or al-Qaida. She wanted to talk about "regime change" in Iraq, setting the stage for the U.S.-led invasion more than a year later.

President Bush wanted Blair's support, but British officials worried the White House was rushing to war, according to a series of leaked secret Downing Street memos that have renewed questions and debate about Washington's motives for ousting Saddam Hussein.

In one of the memos, British Foreign Office political director Peter Ricketts openly asks whether the Bush administration had a clear and compelling military reason for war.

"U.S. scrambling to establish a link between Iraq and al-Qaida is so far frankly unconvincing," Ricketts says in the memo. "For Iraq, `regime change' does not stack up. It sounds like a grudge between Bush and Saddam."

So, The British got it so much better than most of this country did. Easy to do when you have access to all the good information. However, being impressed with their foresight and wisdom becomes fairly tarnished when it is learned that they knew we were full of shit and yet they went along with it anyway. This could have been stopped right then had Blair taken a stand and put the interest of the people that have now died ahead of their loyalty oath. But hey, what's a couple thousand lives to these guys? Afterall, since they bought the bullshit they must have been convinced, perhaps, by statements like Wolfowitz or Pearle remarking about the quick war, low costs, welcome with open arms and flowers analogy...Oh wait, they thought that was bullshit too!? So, now we need to know why we actually went into this war as well as why the British did too, knowing full well the consequences and even being spot on right about them in the end.

"The documents confirm Blair was genuinely concerned about Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction, but also indicate he was determined to go to war as America's top ally, even though his government thought a pre-emptive attack may be illegal under international law.

"The truth is that what has changed is not the pace of Saddam Hussein's WMD programs, but our tolerance of them post-11 September," said a typed copy of a March 22, 2002 memo obtained Thursday by The Associated Press and written to Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.

"But even the best survey of Iraq's WMD programs will not show much advance in recent years on the nuclear, missile or CW/BW (chemical or biological weapons) fronts: the programs are extremely worrying but have not, as far as we know, been stepped up."

Ok, I'm convinced Bush lied. Bush lied to Congress, the people but somehow he was straight enough with the British that they saw the truth at the time. The rest of us weren't sure at the time, were we? I had my doubts, I remember saying at the beginning of the war that my wish to believe the President was going to over ride my doubts about WMD. I hoped they were going to be there because if they weren't there was going to be hell to pay. The WMD weren't there, we were lied to. I ihate to see it happen again, let alone in a time of war, but this is reason for impeachment.

America got screwed in the 2000 election and then we made a massive mistake in the 2004. I think that we need to get political bankruptcy and clear these lying, power mad, murdering bastards out of power and begin the work of repairing our great Republic. We need to finsih our job in getting Iraq on it's feet but we need to start finding ways to do so faster and with more of our guys coming home and their guys protecting Iraq. The British ned to manage this as well...While I like that "they knew" they also did not stop it. The blood is on their hands despite the notion they were somewhat less willing.

"The eight documents total 36 pages and range from 10-page and eight-page studies on military and legal options in Iraq, to brief memorandums from British officials and the minutes of a private meeting held by Blair and his top advisers.

Toby Dodge, an Iraq expert who teaches at Queen Mary College, University of London, said the documents confirmed what post-invasion investigations have found.

"The documents show what official inquiries in Britain already have, that the case of weapons of mass destruction was based on thin intelligence and was used to inflate the evidence to the level of mendacity," Dodge said. "In going to war with Bush, Blair defended the special relationship between the two countries, like other British leaders have. But he knew he was taking a huge political risk at home. He knew the war's legality was questionable and its unpopularity was never in doubt."

Dodge said the memos also show Blair was aware of the postwar instability that was likely among Iraq's complex mix of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds once Saddam was defeated."

They knew! THey fucking knew what they were getting into was horseshit and look at us?! Here we are stuck ina miserable, unpopular quagmire of stupidity and Bush's popularity is at an all time low. This is not good for our country, our image nor our future. Mr. Bush America is not safer because of this war. That is a lie as well. You murdering jackass.

"Bush and Blair both have been criticized at home since their WMD claims about Iraq proved false. But both have been re-elected, defending the conflict for removing a brutal dictator and promoting democracy in Iraq. Both administrations have dismissed the memos as old news."

Oh, I see it's old news so lying to Congress and the American people is old news too, eh? Then why hasn't these memos gone away? Not only DID they lie to us but they knew they were going to have to:

"It was in a March 14, 2002, memo that Blair's chief foreign policy adviser, David Manning, told the prime minister about the dinner he had just had with Rice in Washington.

"It is clear that Bush is grateful for your (Blair's) support and has registered that you are getting flak. I said that you would not budge in your support for regime change but you had to manage a press, a Parliament and a public opinion that was very different than anything in the States. And you would not budge either in your insistence that, if we pursued regime change, it must be very carefully done and produce the right result. Failure was not an option."

Manning said, "Condi's enthusiasm for regime change is undimmed." But he also said there were signs of greater awareness of the practical difficulties and political risks."

"Practical Difficulties?" "Political Risks?" Tell this to the mother of a fallen soldier. Matter of fact, tell it to all 1,700 of them. Then tell all the mothers of the injured and hey tell the injured especially the ones that lost limbs, feet and hands or half a face or can't get out of a wheel chair or a bed. Tell the Tilman family who have already gone through their own personla nightmare of government fucking lies. People on the right are dare calling opponents to this war (and even the torture that has come out of it) as Un-American. The same jackasses were at it during Vietnam.

"We have to be convincing that: the threat is so serious/imminent that it is worth sending our troops to die for; it is qualitatively different from the threat posed by other proliferators who are closer to achieving nuclear capability (including Iran)."

"In particular we need to be sure that the outcome of the military action would match our objective... A postwar occupation of Iraq could lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise. As already made clear, the U.S. military plans are virtually silent on this point."

"If 11 September had not happened, it is doubtful that the U.S. would now be considering military action against Iraq," Straw wrote. "In addition, there has been no credible evidence to link Iraq with OBL (Osama bin Laden) and al-Qaida."
He also questioned stability in a post-Saddam Iraq: "We have also to answer the big question -- what will this action achieve? There seems to be a larger hole in this than on anything."

Got it yet? The only thing I question is that as far as I know Iraq was on the agenda as soon as they got in office...They just didn't know how they were going to get there THEN 9/11 happened.