Weekend Reading: Dylan Matthews: No, Really, George W. Bush Lied About WMDs
No, Really, George W. Bush Lied About WMDs: "The best estimates available suggest that more than 250,000 people have died as a result of George W. Bush and Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq in 2003...:
...A newly released investigative report from the UK government suggests that intelligence officials knew ahead of time that the war would cause massive instability and societal collapse and make the problem of terrorism worse — and that Blair and Bush went ahead with the effort anyway.
The correct response to this situation is to despair at the fact that the US and UK governments created such a horrific human tragedy for no good reason at all. However, partisan grudgefests run deep, and some on the right have argued that the UK’s Chilcot report proves the real dastardly actors are liberals who accused Bush and Blair not just of relying on faulty intelligence suggesting Iraq had WMDs but of lying about the intelligence they did have.
To some extent, this is beside the point; even if they had been totally cautious and careful in characterizing the intelligence, the war still would’ve been a catastrophic mistake that took an immense human toll.
But the truth also matters, and the truth is that there were numerous occasions when Bush and his advisers made statements that intelligence agencies knew to be false, both about WMDs and about Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent links to al-Qaeda. The term commonly used for making statements that one knows to be false is 'lying.'
Mother Jones’s David Corn has been excellent about chronicling specific examples over the years. Here are just a few:
In October 2002, Bush said that Saddam Hussein had a 'massive stockpile' of biological weapons. But as CIA Director George Tenet noted in early 2004, the CIA had informed policymakers it had 'no specific information on the types or quantities of weapons agent or stockpiles at Baghdad's disposal.' The 'massive stockpile' was just literally made up.
In December 2002, Bush declared, 'We do not know whether or not [Iraq] has a nuclear weapon.' That was not what the National Intelligence Estimate said. As Tenet would later testify, 'We said that Saddam did not have a nuclear weapon and probably would have been unable to make one until 2007 to 2009.' Bush did know whether or not Iraq had a nuclear weapon — and lied and said he didn’t know to hype the threat.
On CNN in September 2002, Condoleezza Rice claimed that aluminum tubes purchased by Iraq were 'only really suited for nuclear weapons programs.' This was precisely the opposite of what nuclear experts at the Energy Department were saying; they argue that not only was it very possible the tubes were for nonnuclear purposes but that it was very likely they were too. Even more dire assessments about the tubes from other agencies were exaggerated by administration officials — and in any case, the claim that they’re 'only really suited' for nuclear weapons is just false.
On numerous occasions, Dick Cheney cited a report that 9/11 conspirator Mohammed Atta had met in Prague with an Iraqi intelligence officer. He said this after the CIA and FBI concluded that this meeting never took place.
More generally on the question of Iraq and al-Qaeda, on September 18, 2001, Rice received a memo summarizing intelligence on the relationship, which concluded there was little evidence of links. Nonetheless Bush continued to claim that Hussein was 'a threat because he’s dealing with al-Qaeda' more than a year later.
In August 2002, Dick Cheney declared, 'Simply stated, there's no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.' But as Corn notes, at that time there was 'no confirmed intelligence at this point establishing that Saddam had revived a major WMD operation.' Gen. Anthony Zinni, who had heard the same intelligence and attended Cheney’s speech, would later say in a documentary, 'It was a total shock. I couldn't believe the vice president was saying this, you know? In doing work with the CIA on Iraq WMD, through all the briefings I heard at Langley, I never saw one piece of credible evidence that there was an ongoing program.'
The Bush administration on numerous occasions exaggerated or outright fabricated conclusions from intelligence in its public statements. Bush really did lie, and people really did die as a result of the war those lies were meant to build a case for. Those are the facts.
The failure of Iraq was not merely a case of well-meaning but incompetent policymakers rushing into what they should’ve known would be a disaster. It’s the story of those policymakers repeatedly misleading the public about why, exactly, the war started.