Uhoh, some Bush administrations flip-flop.
What part of this statement is unclear?: Mr Rumsfeld was asked by a New
York audience about connections between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.
"To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the
two," he said.
It just keeps pouring out. Funny how the truth works that way.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3715396.stm
Rumsfeld questions Saddam-Bin Laden link
Rumsfeld's comments can be revealing
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has cast doubt on whether there was
ever a relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.
The alleged link was one of the justifications used by President George W
Bush for the invasion of Iraq.
Mr Rumsfeld was asked by a New York audience about connections between
Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.
When asked about the putative link during a session at the Council on
Foreign Relations in New York on Monday, the defence secretary said: "I have
seen the answer to that question migrate in the intelligence community over
a period of a year in the most amazing way."
'Misunderstood'
The BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says Mr Rumsfeld's blunt
admission seems to give added weight to one of Democratic presidential
challenger John Kerry's most telling punches, when he accused President Bush
of fighting the wrong war for the wrong reasons.
However, he adds that the minds of many voters may already be made up.
In the past, Mr Rumsfeld has spoken of credible information about a link,
while Vice-President ***** Cheney regularly goes further and talks of Saddam
Hussein having provided safe harbour and sanctuary for al-Qaeda.
Several hours after his appearance, Mr Rumsfeld issued a statement saying
his comments had been "regrettably misunderstood" and that he had
acknowledged there were ties between Osama Bin Laden and Iraq based upon CIA
intelligence.
This included "solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qaeda members,
including some that have been in Baghdad", he said.
No proof
On Monday, Mr Rumsfeld also said intelligence about weapons of mass
destruction before the invasion had been faulty and that the US had been
unable to find any such weapons.
"Why the intelligence proved wrong, I'm not in a position to say, but the
world is a lot better off with Saddam Hussein in jail," he said.
Mr Rumsfeld added that Saddam Hussein's regime was not the "Little Sisters
of the Poor" - Iraq had been on the US State Department's terrorist list and
made payments for Palestinian suicide bombings, he said.
"The relationships between these folks are complicated. They evolve and
change over time. In many cases, these different networks have common
funders."
He also said that although most of al-Qaeda's senior leaders had sworn an
oath to Osama Bin Laden, the man suspected to be the principal leader of the
network in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had not.
Mr Zarqawi's reported presence in Baghdad before the war has been cited in
the past by the US administration as evidence of a link between Saddam
Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Iraq mistakes
The former US governor of Iraq, Paul Bremer, said on Monday the US had made
two mistakes in the conflict in Iraq - although he was still in favour of
intervening in Iraq.
One error was not having enough ground troops to take control of the
country, he said.
The US also made the mistake of not containing the violence and looting
quickly enough after Saddam Hussein was ousted, he said.
"We paid a big price for not stopping it because it established an
atmosphere of lawlessness," he told a conference in West Virginia.
.
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
08 Oct 2004 07:24:17 AM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ck605q$agd$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:fpGdncTxwYdW4_vcRVn-qQ@locallink.net...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ck3fgr$3gn$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:ntWdnVYsKLEv3fjcRVn-jw@locallink.net...
Careful, Jean. Your position has declined rapidly of late. It's
about
to
take a steep nosedive in the run up to the election. YOUR fartitude
will
be
plainly exposed as well.
It's been exposed for years. Jeez, if we coudl find a way of
harnessing
Jean's fartitude for energy generation we'd never have to worry about
fossil
fuels running out again. The pollution might be a bit much to take
though..
Well, ya know, with crude at $52 a barrel maybe it would be worth a
Canadian
national mobilization to find a way to tap Jean's crude.
Best of luck refining it!
I've heard it may be too unstable and volatile to deal with safely....
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.771 / Virus Database: 518 - Release Date: 9/28/04
.
|
|
|
|
| User: " John F Lemke" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
08 Oct 2004 07:24:32 AM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ck605q$agd$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:fpGdncTxwYdW4_vcRVn-qQ@locallink.net...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ck3fgr$3gn$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:ntWdnVYsKLEv3fjcRVn-jw@locallink.net...
Careful, Jean. Your position has declined rapidly of late. It's
about
to
take a steep nosedive in the run up to the election. YOUR fartitude
will
be
plainly exposed as well.
It's been exposed for years. Jeez, if we coudl find a way of
harnessing
Jean's fartitude for energy generation we'd never have to worry about
fossil
fuels running out again. The pollution might be a bit much to take
though..
Well, ya know, with crude at $52 a barrel maybe it would be worth a
Canadian
national mobilization to find a way to tap Jean's crude.
Best of luck refining it!
Very true. "I'll" be keeping my distance. Maybe read about it in the
paper.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
14 Oct 2004 08:17:12 AM |
|
|
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:fpGdncTxwYdW4_vcRVn-qQ@locallink.net...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ck3fgr$3gn$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:ntWdnVYsKLEv3fjcRVn-jw@locallink.net...
Careful, Jean. Your position has declined rapidly of late. It's about
to
take a steep nosedive in the run up to the election. YOUR fartitude
will
be
plainly exposed as well.
It's been exposed for years. Jeez, if we coudl find a way of harnessing
Jean's fartitude for energy generation we'd never have to worry about
fossil
fuels running out again. The pollution might be a bit much to take
though..
Well, ya know, with crude at $52 a barrel maybe it would be worth a
Canadian
national mobilization to find a way to tap Jean's crude. I mean, it's not
like they'd have to do any sort of long term exploration to begin with.
The only risk of it running out would be if he ever learns to shut his
mouth.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.771 / Virus Database: 518 - Release Date: 9/28/04
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
15 Oct 2004 06:27:19 AM |
|
|
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvin@galaxy.com> wrote in message
news:1097759841.OAyVL5nZVRwM+Iwnd5qhVA@teranews...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:fpGdncTxwYdW4_vcRVn-qQ@locallink.net...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ck3fgr$3gn$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:ntWdnVYsKLEv3fjcRVn-jw@locallink.net...
Careful, Jean. Your position has declined rapidly of late. It's
about
to
take a steep nosedive in the run up to the election. YOUR fartitude
will
be
plainly exposed as well.
It's been exposed for years. Jeez, if we coudl find a way of
harnessing
Jean's fartitude for energy generation we'd never have to worry about
fossil
fuels running out again. The pollution might be a bit much to take
though..
Well, ya know, with crude at $52 a barrel maybe it would be worth a
Canadian
national mobilization to find a way to tap Jean's crude. I mean, it's
not
like they'd have to do any sort of long term exploration to begin with.
The only risk of it running out would be if he ever learns to shut his
mouth.
That's a pretty minimal risk don't you think?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
08 Oct 2004 09:29:47 AM |
|
|
Wallowing in your fartitude again, hey, losers.
J.
John F Lemke a écrit:
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ck3fgr$3gn$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:ntWdnVYsKLEv3fjcRVn-jw@locallink.net...
Careful, Jean. Your position has declined rapidly of late. It's about
to
take a steep nosedive in the run up to the election. YOUR fartitude
will
be
plainly exposed as well.
It's been exposed for years. Jeez, if we coudl find a way of harnessing
Jean's fartitude for energy generation we'd never have to worry about
fossil
fuels running out again. The pollution might be a bit much to take
though..
Well, ya know, with crude at $52 a barrel maybe it would be worth a Canadian
national mobilization to find a way to tap Jean's crude. I mean, it's not
like they'd have to do any sort of long term exploration to begin with.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
07 Oct 2004 12:08:42 PM |
|
|
John F Lemke a écrit:
"Jean Guernon" <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message
news:H4Y8d.33180$N%.8479@edtnps84...
haha like capturing Binny? LOL
Marvin says:
The only reason I can find for you laughing at Bin Laden not being
captured
Is BECAUSE you are an idiot. I don't laugh at him not being captured i
laugh at neo-liberal assholes who pretend that Bush is just waiting for
the election to capture him. Idiots like you.
J.
Intelligence sources have been saying for months that Bin Laden could be
captured at any moment, that it was just a matter of time. Even Madeleine
Albright "joked" before an interview with Morton Kondrake that they'd
already captured him. The people that witnessed that statement said they
didn't think she was joking.
Bah, the ***** has nothing to do with Bush.
Careful, Jean. Your position has declined rapidly of late. It's about to
take a steep nosedive in the run up to the election. YOUR fartitude will be
plainly exposed as well.
hahahaha, according to who? To weasels like you? LOL
They can kiss my *****!
Jean Guernon, the last lonely neocon voice echoing on apn. LOL
Thank you very much.
J.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
05 Oct 2004 01:47:51 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android a écrit:
Yeah ... what's funnier is Bremer said this week the admin didn't deploy
enough troops to keep the peace ... lawlessness ensued .... hence the
current nightmare. The impression from him is that this mess could've been
avoided if not for Bushie and Rummie.
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:pJGdnVPO1KF0D__cRVn-gA@locallink.net...
Uhoh, some Bush administrations flip-flop.
What part of this statement is unclear?: Mr Rumsfeld was asked by a New
York audience about connections between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin
Laden.
"To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the
two," he said.
It just keeps pouring out. Funny how the truth works that way.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3715396.stm
Rumsfeld questions Saddam-Bin Laden link
Rumsfeld's comments can be revealing
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has cast doubt on whether there was
ever a relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.
The alleged link was one of the justifications used by President George W
Bush for the invasion of Iraq.
Mr Rumsfeld was asked by a New York audience about connections between
Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.
When asked about the putative link during a session at the Council on
Foreign Relations in New York on Monday, the defence secretary said: "I
have
seen the answer to that question migrate in the intelligence community
over
a period of a year in the most amazing way."
'Misunderstood'
The BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says Mr Rumsfeld's
blunt
admission seems to give added weight to one of Democratic presidential
challenger John Kerry's most telling punches, when he accused President
Bush
of fighting the wrong war for the wrong reasons.
However, he adds that the minds of many voters may already be made up.
In the past, Mr Rumsfeld has spoken of credible information about a link,
while Vice-President ***** Cheney regularly goes further and talks of
Saddam
Hussein having provided safe harbour and sanctuary for al-Qaeda.
Several hours after his appearance, Mr Rumsfeld issued a statement saying
his comments had been "regrettably misunderstood" and that he had
acknowledged there were ties between Osama Bin Laden and Iraq based upon
CIA
intelligence.
This included "solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qaeda members,
including some that have been in Baghdad", he said.
No proof
On Monday, Mr Rumsfeld also said intelligence about weapons of mass
destruction before the invasion had been faulty and that the US had been
unable to find any such weapons.
"Why the intelligence proved wrong, I'm not in a position to say, but the
world is a lot better off with Saddam Hussein in jail," he said.
Mr Rumsfeld added that Saddam Hussein's regime was not the "Little Sisters
of the Poor" - Iraq had been on the US State Department's terrorist list
and
made payments for Palestinian suicide bombings, he said.
"The relationships between these folks are complicated. They evolve and
change over time. In many cases, these different networks have common
funders."
He also said that although most of al-Qaeda's senior leaders had sworn an
oath to Osama Bin Laden, the man suspected to be the principal leader of
the
network in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had not.
Mr Zarqawi's reported presence in Baghdad before the war has been cited in
the past by the US administration as evidence of a link between Saddam
Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Hey, you forgot to take out the above paragraph from the article. tss tss
LOL
J.
Iraq mistakes
The former US governor of Iraq, Paul Bremer, said on Monday the US had
made
two mistakes in the conflict in Iraq - although he was still in favour of
intervening in Iraq.
One error was not having enough ground troops to take control of the
country, he said.
The US also made the mistake of not containing the violence and looting
quickly enough after Saddam Hussein was ousted, he said.
"We paid a big price for not stopping it because it established an
atmosphere of lawlessness," he told a conference in West Virginia.
.
|
|
|
| User: " John F Lemke" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
06 Oct 2004 07:07:03 AM |
|
|
"Jean Guernon" <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message
news:r%B8d.24480$223.5601@edtnps89...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:pJGdnVPO1KF0D__cRVn-gA@locallink.net...
"The relationships between these folks are complicated. They evolve and
change over time. In many cases, these different networks have common
funders."
He also said that although most of al-Qaeda's senior leaders had sworn
an
oath to Osama Bin Laden, the man suspected to be the principal leader of
the
network in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had not.
Mr Zarqawi's reported presence in Baghdad before the war has been cited
in
the past by the US administration as evidence of a link between Saddam
Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Hey, you forgot to take out the above paragraph from the article. tss tss
LOL
J.
Selective editing of the truth is something you may do, Jean. It's also
something the Bush administration has clearly and consistently done.
You've cited a number of "connections" Iraq had with Al-Queda, and a number
of violations they'd made. You've even tried to justify the invasion by
citing future "plans" of the Iraqi leadership. These were all reasons to
maintain the sanctions rather than invade. The sanctions were working
perfectly well as the post-invasion evidence has borne out. The problem is
the sanctions would never give us control of Iraqi oil.
You're an elitist yourself, Jean. Part of the brave, courageous Canadian
"elite" that can sit north of the border and gladly commit our kids and our
treasure on trumped up, twisted, spun and distorted evidence. Just like the
elitist Bush.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
06 Oct 2004 04:32:27 PM |
|
|
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message news:<JNKdnZE09vXNfP7cRVn-hw@locallink.net>...
"Jean Guernon" <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message
news:r%B8d.24480$223.5601@edtnps89...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:pJGdnVPO1KF0D__cRVn-gA@locallink.net...
"The relationships between these folks are complicated. They evolve and
change over time. In many cases, these different networks have common
funders."
He also said that although most of al-Qaeda's senior leaders had sworn
an
oath to Osama Bin Laden, the man suspected to be the principal leader of
the
network in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had not.
Mr Zarqawi's reported presence in Baghdad before the war has been cited
in
the past by the US administration as evidence of a link between Saddam
Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Hey, you forgot to take out the above paragraph from the article. tss tss
LOL
J.
Selective editing of the truth is something you may do, Jean.
Ahhh try telling us again how it was the United States that carved up
the middle east after WWI, will ya?
You foolish liar.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
06 Oct 2004 01:02:32 PM |
|
|
John F Lemke a écrit:
"Jean Guernon" <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message
news:r%B8d.24480$223.5601@edtnps89...
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:pJGdnVPO1KF0D__cRVn-gA@locallink.net...
"The relationships between these folks are complicated. They evolve and
change over time. In many cases, these different networks have common
funders."
He also said that although most of al-Qaeda's senior leaders had sworn
an
oath to Osama Bin Laden, the man suspected to be the principal leader of
the
network in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had not.
Mr Zarqawi's reported presence in Baghdad before the war has been cited
in
the past by the US administration as evidence of a link between Saddam
Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Hey, you forgot to take out the above paragraph from the article. tss tss
LOL
J.
Selective editing of the truth is something you may do, Jean. It's also
something the Bush administration has clearly and consistently done.
*****.
You've cited a number of "connections" Iraq had with Al-Queda, and a number
of violations they'd made. You've even tried to justify the invasion by
citing future "plans" of the Iraqi leadership. These were all reasons to
maintain the sanctions rather than invade. The sanctions were working
perfectly well as the post-invasion evidence has borne out. The problem is
the sanctions would never give us control of Iraqi oil.
Well then they should have made a resolution that didn't call for the
serious consequences in case of any breach. They (the SC) all signed on
to get Saddam at the first breach, he mace a dozen, 5 of which weren't
WMD related. There was no way there was any way out.
You're an elitist yourself, Jean. Part of the brave, courageous Canadian
"elite" that can sit north of the border and gladly commit our kids and our
treasure on trumped up, twisted, spun and distorted evidence. Just like the
elitist Bush.
*****. First there was no trumped up evidence. Saddam breached the
resolution openly he paid for the terrorists who blew up kids in
pizzeria in contravention to article 32 of 687e, he gave worthless
papers to Kuwait instead of giving back their archives, all in the
openly admitted intention of reannexing Kuwait, two violations. He also
didn't give back any POWs from the invasion of Kuwait, nor their bodies
in fact, since he had killed them, another violation of yet another clause.
And we all know that every single report from Blix showed breach.
Now the resolution had given him a last chance to comply with ALL of the
resolution, and it was signed by everyone on the SC.
If they had wanted it otherwise giving him more chance after 123 years
of breach, they would NOT have signed it. that they weaseled out after
flagrant breach only shows that they were ready to jeopardize the UN for
their own dwellings. The worst is Kofi Annan who really showed no
gratitude for saving the UN credibility, but instead recently sided with
the weasels.
Anyway, the fact is that the evidence the US had was the same everybody
had, everyone thought that Saddam had WMDs. Everyone knew the dictator
was working on his WMDs and they all expected they would find them. That
he shipped them to Syria, or buried them, or whatever he did, when he
felt he was going to have the resolution implemented despite the weasels
who kissed his ***** and signed it only to look serious, doesn't change that.
J.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Rumsfeld Questions Al-Queda Link |
06 Oct 2004 03:27:40 AM |
|
|
You know, you make a lot more sense when you just say nothing, Jean. Keep it
up, write by not writing.
"Jean Guernon" <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message
news:r%B8d.24480$223.5601@edtnps89...
Marvin The Paranoid Android a écrit:
Yeah ... what's funnier is Bremer said this week the admin didn't deploy
enough troops to keep the peace ... lawlessness ensued .... hence the
current nightmare. The impression from him is that this mess could've
been
avoided if not for Bushie and Rummie.
" John F Lemke" <jflemke@LocalLink.net> wrote in message
news:pJGdnVPO1KF0D__cRVn-gA@locallink.net...
Uhoh, some Bush administrations flip-flop.
What part of this statement is unclear?: Mr Rumsfeld was asked by a New
York audience about connections between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin
Laden.
"To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links
the
two," he said.
It just keeps pouring out. Funny how the truth works that way.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3715396.stm
Rumsfeld questions Saddam-Bin Laden link
Rumsfeld's comments can be revealing
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has cast doubt on whether there was
ever a relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.
The alleged link was one of the justifications used by President George
W
Bush for the invasion of Iraq.
Mr Rumsfeld was asked by a New York audience about connections between
Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.
When asked about the putative link during a session at the Council on
Foreign Relations in New York on Monday, the defence secretary said: "I
have
seen the answer to that question migrate in the intelligence community
over
a period of a year in the most amazing way."
'Misunderstood'
The BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says Mr Rumsfeld's
blunt
admission seems to give added weight to one of Democratic presidential
challenger John Kerry's most telling punches, when he accused President
Bush
of fighting the wrong war for the wrong reasons.
However, he adds that the minds of many voters may already be made up.
In the past, Mr Rumsfeld has spoken of credible information about a
link,
while Vice-President ***** Cheney regularly goes further and talks of
Saddam
Hussein having provided safe harbour and sanctuary for al-Qaeda.
Several hours after his appearance, Mr Rumsfeld issued a statement
saying
his comments had been "regrettably misunderstood" and that he had
acknowledged there were ties between Osama Bin Laden and Iraq based upon
CIA
intelligence.
This included "solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qaeda
members,
including some that have been in Baghdad", he said.
No proof
On Monday, Mr Rumsfeld also said intelligence about weapons of mass
destruction before the invasion had been faulty and that the US had been
unable to find any such weapons.
"Why the intelligence proved wrong, I'm not in a position to say, but
the
world is a lot better off with Saddam Hussein in jail," he said.
Mr Rumsfeld added that Saddam Hussein's regime was not the "Little
Sisters
of the Poor" - Iraq had been on the US State Department's terrorist list
and
made payments for Palestinian suicide bombings, he said.
"The relationships between these folks are complicated. They evolve and
change over time. In many cases, these different networks have common
funders."
He also said that although most of al-Qaeda's senior leaders had sworn
an
oath to Osama Bin Laden, the man suspected to be the principal leader of
the
network in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had not.
Mr Zarqawi's reported presence in Baghdad before the war has been cited
in
the past by the US administration as evidence of a link between Saddam
Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Hey, you forgot to take out the above paragraph from the article. tss tss
LOL
J.
Iraq mistakes
The former US governor of Iraq, Paul Bremer, said on Monday the US had
made
two mistakes in the conflict in Iraq - although he was still in favour
of
intervening in Iraq.
One error was not having enough ground troops to take control of the
country, he said.
The US also made the mistake of not containing the violence and looting
quickly enough after Saddam Hussein was ousted, he said.
"We paid a big price for not stopping it because it established an
atmosphere of lawlessness," he told a conference in West Virginia.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
