Quote:
Originally Posted by dyna mo
again, my post was about the wikileaks, i've mentioned that many many times, and included stating that i do not endorse the war or justification for it.
not sure why people confuse trying to find a factual view of the past with embracing that view. what's that expression *doomed to repeat something or other*,........
|
No your post original post is about why Wikileaks cables were being "ignored"
These cables contained information that everyone knew about. It had be reported over and over that there were chemical weapons in Iraq. Nobody disputed that Iraq was in possession of chemical weapons, so finding this stuff was expected.
But the basis to get into Iraq was an imminent threat posed by their nuclear capabilities. And there were no nuclear weapons found.
So 7 years after the initial invasion, after finding no nuclear weapons, after all of the money spent, after the massive loss of life, you wanted the media to make a big deal about Iraq having chemical weapons that everyone knew they had?