>
> Bad day, Luke?
You did catch the reference, right? Just trying to point out that, just as you haven't written anything to indicate that you're an ignorant slut, Brian hasn't written anything to indicate that he thinks all US gov't pronouncements ought to be regarded as prima facie plausible.
> Well, Chomsky was covering his bets. I always said --
> you can look it up in the archives -- that we _knew_
> that there were no WMDs, otherwise the US would not
> have attacked Iraq. The Korean example shows what it
> does when there are WMDs. I also agree and have sais
> here that WMDs wiuk not have been a causus belli. jks
Don't equate chemical and biological arms with nukes. I'd imagine that administration offials believed Iraq had the former (though, as the first Gulf War and the current drive to sack Syria and/or Iran show, such weapons _aren't_ enough to deter the US), and knew like everyone else that Iraq didn't have nukes (though they might well have been worried about the possibility of Iraq getting nukes).
-- Luke