COL Gene COL Gene

WHY Bush and Cheney MUST BE IMPEACHED!

WHY Bush and Cheney MUST BE IMPEACHED!



In 2002 Bush and Cheney were telling the American People and Congress that we had to remove Saddam from power because to fail to act would risk “Mushroom clouds over American Cities”. Make no mistake about it, it was the belief that Saddam might use nuclear weapons against the U.S. that was feared most and was the issue that convinced Congress to give President Bush the authority to invade Iraq.

At the same time Bush and Cheney were pushing the nuclear threat issue from Saddam, the National Intelligence Estimate had several conclusions that said Saddam had no such weapons and would most likely not be able to acquire such weapons for 5-7 years. This NIE was classified and was only shared with the top leaders of Congress and the members of the intelligence Committees in Congress. The majority of Congress was not given the NIE assessment that Saddam did not have nuclear weapons in 2002 and would not be able to acquire such weapons for 5-7 years.

Time has proven that the 2002 NIE assessment of Saddam’s nuclear capability was correct. The argument by Bush and Cheney that we did not find WMD in Iraq because of the failure of our intelligence is incorrect so far as the nuclear threat is concerned. Bush further contends that Congress agreed that Saddam was a such a great threat that they gave Bush the authority to go to war AS A LAST RESORT. The problem is that when Congress voted on the Iraq War Resolution, the majority DID NOT have the NIE from 2002 because it was classified. Those few members of Congress that did have this intelligence could not share the information with other members of Congress or the American People without violating the law. Thus Congress acted WITHOUT the intelligence from the 16 U.S. Intelligence Agencies that said in 2002 and for 5-7 years in the future Saddam did not pose the nuclear threat the Bush and Cheney claimed when they asked for the authority to invade Iraq and depose Saddam.

Thus, we had a President and Vice President that ignored the most comprehensive intelligence about the major potential threat from Iraq – nuclear weapons. We had a President and Vice President that warned of the smoking gun in the form of Mushroom Clouds over our cities if we failed to remove Saddam from power knowing that Saddam did not have the weapons to conduct a nuclear attack against the United States!.
It was not the failure of our intelligence but the LIES of our two top leaders about the actual danger to our country posed by Saddam in 2002. For this reason, both Bush and Cheney should be Impeached and removed from office. There is no greater offense that a President can commit then taking our country to war predicated on lies. There was no nuclear threat in 2002 from Saddam and Bush and Cheney had the intelligence that said that was the case and deliberately asserted this danger in direct opposition to the intelligence. They further kept that intelligence CLASSIFIED so it was not available to ALL members of Congress and the American People. Bush and Cheney knew, if Congress and the American people saw that Saddam did not have nuclear weapons they would NOT support the invasion of Iraq.

Below are excerpts from the now declassified 2002 NIE that Bush and Cheney had and the majority of Congress and the American people did not have prior to the Iraq War Vote:


How quickly Iraq will obtain its first nuclear weapon depends on when it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.


Iraq probably would not be able to make a weapon until 2007 to 2009, owing to inexperience in building and operating centrifuge facilities to produce highly enriched uranium and challenges in procuring the necessary equipment and expertise.

Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger cause for making war.

State/INR Alternative View of Iraq's Nuclear Program
The Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research (INR) believes that Saddam continues to want nuclear weapons and that available evidence indicates that Baghdad is pursuing at least a limited effort to maintain and acquire nuclear weapons-related capabilities. The activities we have detected do not, however, add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what INR would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons. Iraq may be doing so, but INR considers the available evidence inadequate to support such a judgment. Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program, INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result, INR is unable to predict when Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.
In INR's view Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum tubes is central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, but INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors. INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose. INR considers it far more likely that the tubes are intended for another purpose, most likely the production of artillery rockets. The very large quantities being sought, the way the tubes were tested by the Iraqis, and the atypical lack of attention to operational security in the procurement efforts are among the factors, in addition to the DOE assessment, that lead INR to conclude that the tubes are not intended for use in Iraq's nuclear weapons program.

Moderate Confidence:
Iraq does not yet have a nuclear weapon or sufficient material to make one but is likely to have a weapon by 2007 to 2009.
Low Confidence
• When Saddam would use weapons of mass destruction.
• Whether Saddam would engage in clandestine attacks against the US Homeland.
• Whether in desperation Saddam would share chemical or biological weapons with al-Qa'ida.



INR's Alternative View: Iraq's Attempts to Acquire Aluminum Tubes
Some of the specialized but dual-use items being sought are, by all indications, bound for Iraq's missile program. Other cases are ambiguous, such as that of a planned magnet-production line whose suitability for centrifuge operations remains unknown. Some efforts involve non-controlled industrial material and equipment -- including a variety of machine tools -- and are troubling because they would help establish the infrastructure for a renewed nuclear program. But such efforts (which began well before the inspectors departed) are not clearly linked to a nuclear end-use. Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR's assessment, highly dubious.
48,084 views 184 replies
Reply #151 Top
It might take another election for the American People to get the changes they want.


The problem is nobody wants the socialist changes that you want.  I see you that you keep speaking for the "American people" as usual.

Will you support Hillary in '08?


Reply #152 Top
So for the next six years you'll say that the Dems are being burdened by what the Republicans did in the previous majority. Then, when more level headed people give up on their empty talk and vote back in a Republican majority, you'll be back to saying the Dems can't do anything because of that.

For someone who supposedly disapproves of empty-headed, knee-jerk support of Republicans, you do a lot of it for Dems. Don't you feel odd making so many excuses and then condemning people for making excuses?
Reply #153 Top

It might take another election for the American People to get the changes they want.


The problem is nobody wants the socialist changes that you want. I see you that you keep speaking for the "American people" as usual.

Will you support Hillary in '08?


You know what surprises me most? The fact that we're "still" feeding this troll (col gene).
Reply #154 Top
IslandDog

Well the vast majority do not want the policies of Bush and the GOP.
Reply #155 Top
Well the vast majority do not want the policies of Bush and the GOP.


And you think they want a socialist state like you and Hillary propose?  If people wanted higher taxes and federal funded health care, we would have President Kerry right now. 


Reply #156 Top
Well the vast majority do not want the policies of Bush and the GOP.


Right they elected him twice but they don't want him any more. Lucky for the President that he can only be elected two times. Love your logic or lack there of.
Reply #157 Top
Paladoin77

People were still in a FOG in 2004. That FOG has lifted in 2006. Watch what happens in 2008!

Island Dog

Where the conservatives go off the reservation is by thinking that we should have a conservative Court system and conservative policies. The truth is that the MAJORITY in America is NOT conservatives nor are they far left. What we need are policies that strike a balance and are where the majority want to be politically. Bush and the GOP did not understand that nearly as well as Clinton. Even though Clinton was a liberal, his policies were far more centrist then the Bush/GOP policies!
Reply #158 Top
People were still in a FOG in 2004. That FOG has lifted in 2006. Watch what happens in 2008!


LOL.  Keep believing that col.  The democrats are already starting to eat each other alive.


The truth is that the MAJORITY in America is NOT conservatives nor are they far left. What we need are policies that strike a balance and are where the majority want to be politically. Bush and the GOP did not understand that nearly as well as Clinton. Even though Clinton was a liberal, his policies were far more centrist then the Bush/GOP policies!


The DNC itself says this country is more conservative and "centrist" than liberal.  The GOP was not conservative enough and the conservative voters stayed home to "punish" the GOP.  What they now realize is by doing that they got defeatist democrats elected.  Democrats are far left like yourself, almost to the point of socialists. 

The thing that democrats don't realize yet is this election cycle they will actually have to have ideas.  What that means is they will actually need to tell people what they support because this time they can't just rely on "we hate Bush".


Reply #159 Top
People were still in a FOG in 2004. That FOG has lifted in 2006. Watch what happens in 2008!


And the fog for 2000? I will be looking at 2008. Who is your pic for 2008 and why?
Reply #160 Top
I do not have a pick because I do not have a clear understanding of how the possible candidates intends to resolve the major issues that face our country.
Reply #161 Top
I do not have a pick because I do not have a clear understanding of how the possible candidates intends to resolve the major issues that face our country.


You are so silly.

LOL
Reply #162 Top
Paladin77

I guess you would pick someone to support without a clue as to how they would govern. Sounds like something you would do given the BS you spew on this Blog site!
Reply #163 Top
guess you would pick someone to support without a clue as to how they would govern. Sounds like something you would do given the BS you spew on this Blog site!


Nope, I support Bush for President! He has done a great job and I think he would be a great world leader.

Based on your stated opinion none of the people who have said they wish to be the next president has shown you any leadership skills. So none of them are worthy of being president in your eyes.
Reply #164 Top
Paladin77

"I support Bush for President! He has done a great job and I think he would be a great world leader” Your statement PROVES you are NUTS!

Reply #165 Top
Your statement PROVES you are NUTS!


Please explain.
Reply #166 Top
paladin77

Anyone that would continue to support GWB after the disaster he has created in Iraq, the deficit, trade, lack of border security etc. is out of their mind. Bush has done so much harm to our country that for anyone that would support such a leader means that think that harm he has done is OK for our country. That is because they are either a traitor or they are NUTS! Which one are you?
Reply #167 Top
Bush has done so much harm to our country that for anyone that would support such a leader means that think that harm he has done is OK for our country.


Actually he hasn't col.  It's your one-sided leftist view of the U.S. that makes you think that way. 
Reply #168 Top
Anyone that would continue to support GWB after the disaster he has created in Iraq, the deficit, trade, lack of border security etc. is out of their mind.


This explains why your so far behind the rest of the world. President Bush can not be re-elected so logic would dictate I was writing about another George Bush I was thinking of George P. Bush the Grandson of George H. W. Bush. Your hate of the current president blinds you of anything that does not feed that hate.

Reply #169 Top
Bush has screwed up everything he has touched. Iraq, Trade, defect, Energy and the list goes on. You like him and Cheney live in total denial.
Reply #170 Top
Bush has screwed up everything he has touched. Iraq, Trade, defect, Energy and the list goes on. You like him and Cheney live in total denial.


You sir are a political hack
Reply #171 Top
Your opinion of me does not alter the fact that Bush has screwed up everything he has touched! Your opinion is worthless on any issue I have read that you posted on this web site.
Reply #172 Top
Your opinion of me does not alter the fact that Bush has screwed up everything he has touched! Your opinion is worthless on any issue I have read that you posted on this web site.


This is where you are wrong. It is not an opinion of you it is a verified fact. I am not name calling I am pointing out to other readers what you are. Never have I seen you admit to being wrong on anything. When you are faced with evidence that you are wrong from several sources you ignore it and continue to spout what is obvious a lie. That is what a political hack does. I don’t use it as an insult while you call people names with no facts to back it up. Those are opinions not facts. Do you see the difference?
Reply #173 Top
Your opinion of me does not alter the fact that Bush has screwed up everything he has touched! Your opinion is worthless on any issue I have read that you posted on this web site.


Your ignorance is astounding! He's OUT in 2008! Get over it! The "really" ONLY worthless opinion here is yours!
Reply #174 Top
This is where you are wrong. It is not an opinion of you it is a verified fact. I am not name calling I am pointing out to other readers what you are. Never have I seen you admit to being wrong on anything. When you are faced with evidence that you are wrong from several sources you ignore it and continue to spout what is obvious a lie.


I dunno, Paladin. Much as I'm not a COL Gene fan, at least he sticks around. In case you missed it, scatter hit the bricks pretty quickly when I mopped the floor with him on his "global warming caused tornadoes in Florida".

I'm still smarting on that one. I won the debate, cleanly and decisively, now where's my cookie? LOL!
Reply #175 Top
Your opinion of me does not alter the fact that Bush has screwed up everything he has touched! Your opinion is worthless on any issue I have read that you posted on this web site.


That is not a "fact", that is your opinion, one-sided as it is.