Posted: Dec 06, 2016 5:41 pm
SkyMutt wrote:Teague wrote:Oh let me add - what peer review findings did they report on with WMD's in Iraq? They seemed pretty good at dispensining exactly what your government wanted.
Perhaps you're unaware of the fact that there were reports in the mainstream press that questioned the claims of the Bush administration in the run-up to the Iraq war. For instance, from September 2002:
"Lack of hard evidence of Iraqi weapons worries top U.S. officials"
"Iraq has been unable to get materials needed for nuclear bomb, experts say"
From October 2002:
"CIA report reveals analysts' split over extent of Iraqi nuclear threat"
There are others that can be found as well. If you want to get a better understanding of how the mainstream press covered the push to war, one good book is HUBRIS, by Isikoff and Corn. Yes, many mainstream outlets didn't seriously question the claims. However it would be inaccurate to imply that it completely failed to call them into question. I remember reading stories like the above before the invasion, which is why I participated in the anti-war demonstrations, along with thousands of others in the US, and across the world.
They were pathetic. I noticed though they couldn't get enough of "embedding" their reporters into it and spared no expense doing that. To think the MSM played a critical role in questioning the war is a little OTT. I rather think they couldn't wait for it to kick off tbh.