Invasion wasn't an "Intelligence Failure" How Stupid are We?

[Rolling Titanic]

Donald Rumsfeld's comments to Congress on July 9, 2003.

The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq's pursuit of weapons of mass murder," Rumsfeld said.

He said the terrorist strikes on New York and Washington in 2001 "changed our appreciation of our vulnerability" to attacks with chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/10/sprj.irq.wmd /

(CBS/AP) Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday told Congress that the U.S. invaded Iraq not because of a new threat of weapons of mass destruction but because of new fears they might be used.

"The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq's pursuit of weapons of mass murder," Rumsfeld said. "We acted because we saw the existing evidence in a new light through the prism of our experience on Sept. 11."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/09/iraq/main562451.shtml

[JuniorPlankton]

1. Based on the numbers for the war support

we are pretty stupid!

[einniv]

2. To me, even that they are trying to put out spin like this

tells me that they (Bush, GOP, media) think (know?) the American people are extremely stupid.
Will the people buy it like they did when they allowed Bush to shift 100% of the blame for 9-11 on to the intel community?
I'd like to believe that only happened because 9-11 was such a traumatic thing for so many, but I really don't know.

[Zero Gravitas]

3. Intelligence Failure

there was an intelligence failure. It occured, as it does every day of the week, in the Oval Office.

[maggrwaggr]

4. there's an intelligence failure across America

So what do you call a person who gets raped, then lets it happen again? And who admires the rapist, and says the rapist is doing a good thing?

That's beyond stupid. That's 50% of America.