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

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 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

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 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 6 points 8 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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

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

[–] faceless 2 points 8 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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

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