The Run-up to Iraq - Warning: This Post Contains Sarcasm
I am greatly puzzled by today's article in the Washington Post about Iraq. It suggests the congressional report into Bush and Cheney's use of intelligence to get us into the Iraq war, won't be done before the November elections. Gee, why wouldn't the Republicans want this out there as quickly as possible? If Bush and Cheney lied us into a war, that would surely be an impeachable offense, so why wouldn't the Republicans want to clear this matter up? They're acting like if the American People knew what really happened, there'd be hell to pay. And you know who I feel the most sympathy for? All the people who write into the blogs defending Bush and Cheney, and how these two great men were hoodwinked by those incompetent intelligence officers. These loyal supporters deserve to have the truth out there so they don't have to hear about how their beloved heroes might just be two of the worst scoundrels in American History. So where is the report? Why are the Republicans stalling on this? I know. My guess is the report was just about to be released just like Chairman Roberts said. But then some Bush-hating progressive traitor in the government printing office accidentally "lost" it. Darn, those lefties.
Report on Prewar Intelligence Lagging
posted by Bill McDonald @ 12:03 PM
20 comments
20 Comments:
Who cares? Its already been investigated. Read the bi-partisan Silberman-Robb report.
From the Washington Post, 11-12-05:
"President Bush and his national security adviser have answered critics of the Iraq war in recent days with a two-pronged argument: that Congress saw the same intelligence the administration did before the war, and that independent commissions have determined that the administration did not misrepresent the intelligence.
Neither assertion is wholly accurate."
It's the same old game. You throw a limited investigation together, and then hide behind the results. It's very similar to the 9/11 Commission's limited scope with Bush and Cheney not under oath and appearing together. Meanwhile the faithful jump on the results with comments like yours.
If the case proves what you think it does, the Republicans have only to gain by releasing the current report - something they said they would do soon. Of course that was 9 months ago. If the facts support your case that Bush and Cheney were duped by bad intelligence and that Congress saw the same stuff, then why not bring it out? The answer to that is the facts support deliberate deception by the White House. Congress did not see the same intelligence, plus the intelligence they got had many of the warnings stripped out and was presented as much stronger than it actually was. That puts the enitre "But Congress went along" argument in the garbage can of history where so much of this administration's spin will end up.
How bad is it when your best case scenario is that you just got it wrong?
Here's more form the same article:
Bush and his aides had access to much more voluminous intelligence information than did lawmakers, who were dependent on the administration to provide the material. And the commissions cited by officials, though concluding that the administration did not pressure intelligence analysts to change their conclusions, were not authorized to determine whether the administration exaggerated or distorted those conclusions.
National security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, briefing reporters Thursday, countered "the notion that somehow this administration manipulated the intelligence." He said that "those people who have looked at that issue, some committees on the Hill in Congress, and also the Silberman-Robb Commission, have concluded it did not happen."
But the only committee investigating the matter in Congress, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has not yet done its inquiry into whether officials mischaracterized intelligence by omitting caveats and dissenting opinions. And Judge Laurence H. Silberman, chairman of Bush's commission on weapons of mass destruction, said in releasing his report on March 31, 2005: "Our executive order did not direct us to deal with the use of intelligence by policymakers, and all of us were agreed that that was not part of our inquiry."
The volume of intel isn't what is important - its the content. What I think is clear is that there was conflicting information on all fronts - its not like intel is an exact science. So when faced with some information stating Iraq had WMD, and other information stating he didn't, I don't fault the President for taking the position he did - especially seeing how people like you, Bill McDonald, would be the first to charge Bush with being incompetent and guilty of negligent homicide if Saddam were to give terrorists a WMD to discharge in one of our cities.
Liberals like you are hyporcrits. It is exactly like the whole "you failed to connect the dots" charge from the left during the 9/11 hearings. Now when we hear that this administration is doing everything LEGALLY it can to connect the dots, the charge is that they are trampling our civil liberties. You are never going to be satisfied.
I never accused them of not connecting the dots. I think it's much darker than that. As with the Iraq intel I think they went out of their way to achieve the result that happened.
The tragedy is that in both cases - 9/11 and Iraq - they claim they got it wrong, and that is enough to satisfy you. In fact, for your group getting it wrong means getting the Medal of Freedom.
Cheney never believed we'd be greeted as liberators. He couldn't be that dumb. That was part of a marketing strategy. The proof is that even after we weren't, he says his claim was "basically accurate" and you just sit back and buy the whole thing. It's really remarkable in a way.
If President Bush came out tomorrow and announced the sky was falling, you people would all nod your head in agreement.
Bill, first of all, Cheney was absolutley right that we would be greeted as liberators. That was the initial reacion after the overthrow of Saddam. With the exception of the Suni minority (of which Saddam was one and favored), the overwhelming populace of Iraq was happy to be rid of him, and still are. Every poll since the war took place shows that the Iraqi people are happy to be rid of Saddam, and don't want us to immediately pull out.
And if President Bush came out tomorrow and announced "the sky is falling", you and your type would 'nod your heads in agreement' because you think it already is.
Isn't it interesting that the neocons are quick to go to war (using other people's kids) with just the slightest hint of a big, bad weapon, but totally ignore the overwhelming evidence of global warming (which has much more severe consequences)?
War makes them richer, solving real problems might cut their profits by a few cents.
First of all, Anonymous, that was a nice comeback with the sky bit. I liked that one. The liberator point is a little tougher to follow. I don't think the 2000 soldiers who died were welcomed as liberators, and going to the polls is weak. This was part of a marketing push that included glowing forecasts of how few troops we'd need and how Iraqi oil revenue would pay for reconstruction. I think the "welcomed as liberators" thing is a tough sell, but I admire your tenacity.
I just hate to think of how many dead and wounded we'd have if we hadn't been welcomed so well. Of course Cheney and Rumsfeld say the insurgency is in its death throes. You probably buy that part, too.
hyporcrits? Are they related to preverts?
While the Downing Street memo was under-reported in this country, and while additional evidence of the intel deception has come out since, the right wing continues to say there is nothing to the story. Meanwhile they work away spreading the myth that Saddam actually had the WMDs based on some degraded shells from many years before that no munitions expert accepts as proof. Through this careful campaign of relentless lying and spinning the percentage of Americans who now believe the WMD claim was true has risen to 50%. In other words, the right wing spinners continue lying and then criticize others for bringing up the truth and not just letting it go. It's really quite sickening, but so typical of how these sleaze balls operate.
ugg boots uk NetWeiple
cheap ugg boots uk NetWeiple
cheap ugg boots uk NetWeiple
http://uggbootsinukstore.webeden.co.uk
ugg sale uk NetWeiple
ugg sale uk NetWeiple
ugg boots uk NetWeiple
http://uggbootscheap.martuk.co.uk
ugg boots outlet store NetWeiple
ugg sale NetWeiple
ugg boots uk NetWeiple
ugg boots uk NetWeiple
cheap uggs NetWeiple
http://cheapuggboots.martuk.co.uk
Eli Manning Women's Jersey
Heath Miller Youth Jersey
Victor Cruz Pink Jersey
drydayoutraro
axotomarvex Andrew Luck Jersey
Reggie Wayne Jersey
Andrew Luck authentic jersey
UnmannaSmurce
ZesNiclesex www.officialbroncosfansstore.com
Logan Paulsen Women's Jersey
Leonard Hankerson Jersey
nutWhororog
Biansioni Rob Gronkowski Youth Jersey Emmanuel Sanders Youth Jersey Brandon Marshall Kids Jersey
ZesNiclesex Leonard Hankerson Jersey
Robert Griffin III Nike Jersey
Peyton Manning Broncos Jersey
nutWhororog
ZesNiclesex Leonard Hankerson Jersey
Robert Griffin III Nike Jersey
Leonard Hankerson Women's Jersey
nutWhororog
American and Canadian football both descended from rugby and began in Canada as a game between British soldiers garrisoned in Montreal This is a great win-win for the home team winning interception out of the opponent's quarterback in the game
Uniforms generally come in different qualityPeyton Manning Authentic Jersey
sizesAuthentic Peyton Manning Jersey
as well as costing You need to keep in mind that each and every yearPeyton Manning Jersey Youth
the jerseys from your favorite team changes
Post a Comment
<< Home