Monday, April 30, 2012


From the April 29th New York Times:
Some of Mr. Obama’s top advisers worried that the intelligence suggesting that Bin Laden was in the Abbottabad compound was circumstantial and much too flimsy to justify the risks involved. The deputy C.I.A. director, Michael J. Morell, had told the president that in terms of available data points, “the circumstantial evidence of Iraq having W.M.D. was actually stronger than evidence that Bin Laden was living in the Abbottabad compound.”


OBloodyHell said...

Wait, no, getting Bin Laden was all a brave act on the part of the Wunderful Wun. He supervised every moment of it and was aware of every glitch and technical problem, and guided it through the dangerous seas to the Victory That Was.

I know this, the media sold me on it.

Are you saying the Media Lied?



Warren said...

So was Obama more courageous than Bush or more irresponsible?

Assistant Village Idiot said...

Interesting article, though the case is overstated.

Two things: I still don't get why the SEALS were needed if it was a simple assassination mission. The original intent must have been to take him alive. I don't have an opinion whether that was better idea, I simply note that the story doesn't quite add up. Perhaps for good reasons.

Next, I am one who still believes some parts of the WMD program went by trucks to Syria, aided by the Russians, December 2002. There's fair evidence for that, and good reason not to trumpet it once it happened. I doubt it was fully deployable stuff, but more interesting than what was left behind.

I am happy to be considered a paranoid right-wing dead-ender on this matter.

Warren said...


There's lots of evidence that some material went to Syria.

Here are links to parts 1 and 2 of a Larry Elder interview with Gen. Georges Sada, the No. 2 ranking officer with the Iraqi Air Force.,_people_died/page/full/,_people_died_part_ii/page/full/

Carl said...

Actually, I'm convinced that the evidence shows Saddam had chemical and biological WMDs (as part one of Warren's link says), but I've seen no hard evidence of nuclear or other weapons. The Bush Administration made decisions based on the best intel it, and the world community, had--and who can blame them for that?