Re:US 'got it so wrong' on Saddam Hussein, says CIA agent wh...
by tptacek on Sunday December 18, 2016 @05:40PM
(#13208166)
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13208076 regarding availability of evidence (and reply there, if you feel the need, just to keep the thread coherent).
Second, my argument isn't "it's complicated". My argument is that the CIA of 2002 wasn't unanimously in support of the claim that Hussein had weapons programs. The DoD and VP's office, on the other hand, clearly were.
Your third point concedes my argument without rebutting it.
Your fourth point knocks down a straw man.
Second, "its complicated" is a terrible excuse. Lots of things are complicated, this election was really complicated to some people too.
Third, yes, the leadership changes as the CIA director (and lots of the people who work for him) are political appointees. More evidence that they are politically motivated if they ever make any public claims w/r/t the election (which, btw, they haven't actually).
Fourth, I did not suggest that, you read into my statement. My point is purely that we should not accept the word of the CIA (if they ever actually speak about this, and its not just "anonymous sources") at face value and should question and that their historical accuracy should be a factor in that deliberation.