the us claimed that Iraq had wmds, but it was later revealed Iraq has no usable wmds (they had some sarin that expired in the 70s) and the us had a congressional hearing where the armed services confirmed that they considered the unusable wmds as active wmds, even though they could not be used. it was not a conspiracy later proven true like the Tonkin incident, but just using the vague definition of WMD (there is no offical one delcared by the UN) to the army's advantage

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 12 points 9 months ago

Thanks! I remember vaguely. I didn't understand the details back then but I remember that everyone knew it's bs already back then. I put "/s" for a reason under my first comment

[–] hallettj@beehaw.org 23 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The justification for invading Iraq was a claim that they were developing nuclear weapons. It was well known at the time that the evidence was flimsy, and that even if true it was a flimsy excuse for an invasion. The main piece of evidence was an intercepted shipment of aluminum tubes that were soon shown to have nothing to do with a nuclear program. (See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_aluminum_tubes). That one is not a conspiracy theory.

[–] abbenm@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

And when it became clear that there were no nuclear weapons, it became a dishonest equivocation about weapons of mass destruction. Meanwhile, there was also loads of dishonest communication about Iraq's coordination with terrorist groups.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Honestly, it's much easier to come up with a reasonable conspiracy theory around 9/11 than most people think. There's proof that the FBI and DHS knew that the attacks were being planned (iirc they were warned multiple times by Mossad), so it isn't that much of a stretch to believe that the US intentionally ignored the warnings with the knowledge that such an attack would justify another war in the Middle East.

Ignoring the warnings would be a win-win. You get to go to war for oil if they're real, and if they're fake, then nothing happens and life goes on like it always has.

[–] Crack0n7uesday@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think the DHS was set up in response to 9/11 so it didn't exist yet, but the CIA and the NSA also knew about the upcoming attack before it happened.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 1 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I might have misremembered that part, I do remember reading that the US had received multiple warnings about it.

[–] faceless@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think the us government dug its head in the sand on purpose so that they could invade Iraq and take oil

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 1 points 9 months ago

Eh I feel like it's easier to chalk up to organizational incompetence