Does the Senate Committee Report on the Iraq War constitute the truth about the War?

I am responding to a news report (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,558224,00.html) .

Apparently, the US Senate Intelligence Committee's recent Report on the events leading up to the Iraq War, argues that "that President Bush should have known that important claims he made about Iraq did not conform with intelligence reports".

Well, the Senate is a political body, and its conclusions are party political conclusions. One can easily see that if the composition of the Committee had been different, the conclusions too might well have been different: the Committee was composed of eight Democrats and seven Republicans - and the report is as it is only because all the Democrats voted in favour of the existing conclusions as did two of the seven Republicans.

From a non-US perspective, the report simply demonstrates the extent to which Americans are obsessed with themselves.

The Committee does not seem to have asked, nor do I know of any other American who asks, the fundamental question: if there really were no chemical, biological or radiological weapons in Iraq, why did the Iraqi regime so convincingly continue to pretend that it did actually have them?

On the basis of the evidence of Iraqi government behaviour, I am inclined to be highly skeptical of the Report. Against all political correctness, American as well as non-American, I continue to look for evidence that the weapons and weapons programmes in fact existed but were sold, either just before or just after the war started, to some interested party. In my view, the work that the then-Iraqi government did in the field continues to exist and is being nurtured somewhere in the world.

I will stop looking for such evidence and believe the Report, as soon as someone explains convincingly the indubitable and politically incontrovertible evidence of Iraqi government behaviour up to and after the start of the Iraq war. Sphere: Related Content