Looks as though the Iraq invasion obsession allowed a much worse, known and actual terrorist in Zarqawi live. He is now chopping heads off and executing people.

 

I swear, Bush could let Bin Laden dance in the White House and he would still be considered better at handling terrorism.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

 

But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill [Abu Musab] Zarqawi himself ? but never pulled the trigger.

 

In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

 

The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.

 

?Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn?t do it,? said Michael O?Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.

 

Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.

 

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.

 

?People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president?s policy of preemption against terrorists,? according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey. ...

 

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi?s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

The WSJ has further delved into the reasoning. There had to have been a way to get this guy. The spin job now is "its because the UN wouldnt let us!" Even if it was because they had to avoid looking like they were already invading, they didnt need to invade in the first place! The invasion to get a non AQ linked, non 9-11 linked, non US threat Hussein allows al-Zarqawi to go about being much much worse.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1...IaKmGm4,00.html

oh and btw, for those who say Zarqawi's presence there proves we needed to invade, it actually doesnt. Everyone knew what was going on in Northern Iraq and everyone know that it wasnt really in Hussein's control. There were wackjobs up there fighting with the Kurds but not Hussein.

"obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam"

 

So there was an "obsession" with coalition building work now that that is the only convenient way to make this attack stick? Curious.

 

This doesn't say much about the (obviously) false claims that there were no terrorists in Iraq does it?

 

What we have here is "world class" opportunistic flip-flopping.

601395[/snapback]

What we really have is a president that has no idea what he's doing.

Clinton had umpteen opportuniies to wax OBL but repeatedly balked.

 

How many people did OBL kill as opposed to Zarqawi?

Clinton had umpteen opportuniies to wax OBL but repeatedly balked.

 

How many people did OBL kill as opposed to Zarqawi?

601583[/snapback]

 

On Clinton's watch: 0.

 

On Bush's watch: countless.

 

It was found 9/11 could have been prevented. The Bush administration was asleep at the wheel.

 

Your point?

 

Meanwhile Bush has been after OBL for what, 3 years now? I guess its hard to find one person when you send your entire army somewhere else in the hunt for oil.

On Clinton's watch: 0.

 

On Bush's watch: countless.

 

It was found 9/11 could have been prevented. The Bush administration was asleep at the wheel.

 

Your point?

 

Meanwhile Bush has been after OBL for what, 3 years now? I guess its hard to find one person when you send your entire army somewhere else in the hunt for oil.

 

None on Clinton's watch? Please.

 

Yeah, 9/11 was found preventable. 9/11 was preventable if Clinton would of got the fat intern out from underneath his desk and lobbed a tomahawk or two at OBL when he had the chance.

 

And your arguement that troops in Iraq were needed to continue the hunt for OBL or or fight in Afghanistan are laughable. But that's ground we covered already.

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi?s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

 

 

:plain