I think Hell just froze over

[ChadTower]

From the front page of cnn.com:

President Bush today accepted responsibility for going to war in Iraq based on faulty intelligence. "It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq," the president said. Bush also called Thursday's elections in Iraq a "watershed moment in the story of freedom."

Wow.  I wonder where this will lead us.

[Sephroth57]

what is a watershed and where can i purchase one

[ChadTower]

I'll watershed in your mouth.

[Sephroth57]

w00t

[Stingray]

Hey, I screwed up and accidently killed 2000 American military men & women. Ain't y'all glad ya elected me?

-S

[ChadTower]

As did dozens of state Senators, each of which approved the action.  They should be unelected too.

[Witchboard]

I think pretty much everybody knew it was faulty intelligence after the fact, it's just the the far left Dems were starting to turn it into a "Bush Lied" campaign when he didn't lie about anything.

[Grasshopper]

What he won't ever admit is that he and his supporters knew most of the intelligence was bogus at the time they went to war.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong."

In other words...."not my fault!"

Nothing new here, nothing shocking. Same old attempts to white wash history and pass the buck. He has already said that, even if he knew then what he knows now (ie: No WMD, Saddam not a threat, No Al-Qaeda links) he'd STILL invade Iraq.

You can't bargain with insanity.




mrC

[shmokes]

I think that as far as Bush is concerned it's a load of ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---.  I think, however, that it's a good political move in terms of mitigating the damage he's done to the Republican party.  We saw a similar thing a few weeks after the Hurricane Katrina debacle of a response.  Bush knows that he's a lame-duck, so this allows him to take some heat off the republican party without having much appreciable impact on himself since he can't run for office again anyway.

But the thing is, it wasn't about faulty intelligence.  Take a look at this very short article from the Cato institute (a conservative thinktank, not a left-wing propaganda site) from 2002.  It is only pointing out the obvious.  Bush WAS NOT going into Iraq because of faulty intelligence.  The intelligence was gathered after Bush's decision to go to war with Iraq, which was probably made long before he ever took office.  He made the decision to unseat Saddam, and THEN sought intelligence that would allow him to make a case to the public.  After 9/11 he found that case extraordinarily easy to make.

When your premises follow your conclusion, rather than the other way around, it's little wonder when they turn out to be false (or are entirely manufactured, for that matter).

[Grasshopper]

Hey, I screwed up and accidently killed 2000 American military men & women. Ain't y'all glad ya elected me?

-S

Don't forget the 30,000 to 100,000 civilians (estimates vary wildly as the US army refuses to count).

[ChadTower]

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong."

In other words...."not my fault!"

Nothing new here, nothing shocking. Same old attempts to white wash history and pass the buck.

You seem to have trouble with reading whole paragraphs.

"As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq," the president said.

Does that not mean that he is responsible for the decision to go into Iraq?

[Witchboard]

I think, however, that it's a good political move in terms of mitigating the damage he's done to the Republican party.

Let's not forget those others who supported this move on the other side of center as well.  He's pretty much taking responsibility for both parties.

[Grasshopper]

Anyway what intelligence? The 45 minute claim? Give me a break. At the time of the invasion the UN weapons inspectors had found precisely nothing. And they were being granted access by Saddam to his facilities, albeit reluctantly. They asked for a little more time to continue looking for WMD and settle the issue once and for all but Bush in his infinite wisdom decided to invade anyway. After 12 years what was the sudden rush? Well the answer is glaringly obvious. Bush intended to go to war regardless of whether the WMDs existed or not.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

"He made a decision based on faulty information just like everybody else did at the time."

Not that I want to go over this again, and again. But this line is just ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---. With every passing day it becomes more and more apparent that Cheney had cherry-picked intelligence stovepiped to the administration from certifiably shaky sources ("Curveball", Chalabi, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi). This war was then marketed to the american public by the W.H.I.G. (White House Iraq Group) and the false charges against Saddam were trumped up in the pages of the New York Times, Washington Post, etc..through journalists friendly to the administration (Judith Miller, et al). Immediately afterward, the 24-7 news channels referenced these false claims and repeated them ad infinitum. So much so that, in some polls, a huge chunk of American thought Saddam has a direct hand in 9/11!!

Opponents/critics of the war and it's flimsy justifications, both inside and outside the administration, were handily crushed (Plame, Gen. Sinseki, etc) and the chilling effect kept the intelligence community at bay, at least until recently.

Bush got his "War of Choice". Whether he knew the intel was false beforehand is still being investigated, but one thing is for certain, there is way more evidence pointing to the fact that he (and his administration) knew the intel was flimsy and/or false, than there is evidence that he was an innocent bystander, dubbed by a lackadaisical intelligence community, or swarthy tin-pot dictator in the middle east.


mrC

[Harry Potter]

Hmmm. Couldn't see this one coming.

But who cares now. Bush is gone in 2008 so hanging him out to dry would now be a bit pointless.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

You seem to have trouble with reading whole paragraphs.

No I don't.  He has a problem starting paragraphs without first passing the buck.


mrC

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Wow.  I wonder where this will lead us.

Hopefully, impeachment.



mrC

[ChadTower]

Someone's all erect and pointy today. 

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Someone's all erect and pointy today. 

Your Momz just got done doing a little dance for me.   


mrC

[ChadTower]

I'll do a little dance in your mouth.

[Witchboard]

MrC... That's a joke, right?

[Stingray]

Dang, I forgot to post my abortions/ flags image. Well too late now, the poocart is already heckbound.

-S

[ChadTower]

The problem all of those quotes, really, is that words mean stuff.

When words mean stuff, they have meanings.  Thus, words have meanings.

So, you would think that words have meanings, but they don't, they just mean stuff.

[Witchboard]

The problem all of those quotes, really, is that words mean stuff.

When words mean stuff, they have meanings.

[ChadTower]

When the ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- that hit the fan comes from your own mouth, the sprayback is too quick to get out of the way.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

MrC... That's a joke, right?  Bush was the only one who thought Saddam has WMDs?  Hmm.. let's see what the Democrats thought on the subject...

Does it matter who thought what? Didn't it matter what could be "proven"?  Why the f*ck do I care what Hillary or Kerry or Bush or Cheney *THOUGHT* Saddam was doing? What really mattered was what could be proven...and the intel that was used to PROVE Saddam was an "imminent threat" turned out to be dead wrong.

All....of.....it......

Bush and his team are the ONLY ones that based a war on it. Oops.


mrC

[ChadTower]

What can be proven is that nearly all Senators, both Replublican and Democrat, voted to approve military action.

They are accountable as well.  They also each made a decision based on faulty intelligence.

Did the Democrat Senators somehow not place those votes of their own free will?

[Witchboard]

I bet the votes came in from Iran, we just didn't catch them that time.

[Goz]

What can be proven is that nearly all Senators, both Replublican and Democrat, voted to approve military action.

They are accountable as well.  They also each made a decision based on faulty intelligence.

Did the Democrat Senators somehow not place those votes of their own free will?

[sarcasm] No they were victims of the evil Republican influence... Maybe Dubya is a Jedi and he used the Jedi mind trick.. [/sarcasm]

[shmokes]

a huge chunk of American thought Saddam has a direct hand in 9/11!!

I can't let a comment like this go by without clarifying.  20 million people could be considered a huge chunk.  It wasn't just a huge chunk.  Polling data gathered just weeks after 9/11 showed that 3% of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein/Iraq played a role in 9/11.  Two years later that number had grown to 70%.  Three percent to seventy percent between 9/11 and July 2003!!! 

That public misperception was deliberately manufactured by the Bush administration, starting with his 2002 State of the Union address. 

Jesus, I can't help but feel like the majority of readers pass over those numbers with indifference.  63% of the American population did not spontaneously decide, absent any outside influence, that Iraq played a role in 9/11 (it did not, btw).  It was a carefully orchestrated PR campaign that deliberately planted that belief into the American public's head.

Whatever the Bush administration ever believed about Iraq, they ALWAYS knew that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.  They knew that even if their "intelligence" was solid it still made an incredibly lousy case for war.  Seriously, click that link above and read that Cato Institue article.  It's VERY short.  9/11 was tied to Iraq because that was the REAL case the Bush administration took to the American people.  Everything else is just a distraction.  Those guys are unbelievably slimy.   

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I can't let a comment like this go by without clarifying.

And I appreciate it. I just didn't have the energy to dig up the numbers. Especially since those they are directed at just won't acknowledge them anyhow.


mrC

[Ed_McCarron]

Hey, I screwed up and accidently killed 2000 American military men & women.

Which sucks, granted, but I look at it this way.

Everyone over there knew what they were getting into.  I don't buy into the "Hey, I just wanted money for college" thing.

Last question they asked me before I tried to get into the Air Force was "Are you a conscientious objector?" IE, will you have a problem killing someone if told to?

The ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- just ended up on the other end of the stick for those 2000.  Face it, if you are in someone elses territory, holding a gun, no matter what the reason, someones gonna take offense at it.

And, yes, I lost a friend amongst those 2000.

[shmokes]

What can be proven is that nearly all Senators, both Replublican and Democrat, voted to approve military action.

They are accountable as well.  They also each made a decision based on faulty intelligence.

Did the Democrat Senators somehow not place those votes of their own free will?

While I don't think that they are excused, it's not unimportant that these Senators were supporting the war in an environment that Bush had manufactured where 70% of Americans believed that Iraq was responsible for 9/11.  In an ideal world reelection prospects would not get in the way of doing what's right, but Bush knew that he could get Congress in his pocket if he could convince enough of the American people of the 9/11 connection.  What are your constituents going to think about you if you vote against attacking the person responsible for 9/11?

[shmokes]

Face it, if you are in someone elses territory, holding a gun, no matter what the reason, someones gonna take offense at it.

What's so ignorant about this attitude of, "Hey, it's war.  Death happens in war.  What do you expect?" is that it ignores the fact that we didn't HAVE to go to war.  Of course death happens in war, and the people who sign up for the military, whether they really believed it would happen or not, DO agree to die for their country if necessary.  But that doesn't mean it would be okay for a cammander to say, "Private First Class Henderson, when you signed up for the Army you put your life in our hands.  I order you to shoot yourself in the head!!!"  Something tells me that you wouldn't be okay with that order being given to an American soldier.  You wouldn't say, "Well, afterall, he knew going into it that he could die..."

Soldiers are dying in Iraq right now because of an order nearly as stupid and unnecessary as the ridiculous one in my example above.  For that you hold the commanding officer who gave the order, as well as all his enablers, responsible.

[Witchboard]

Well, what about the Iraq withdrawal vote that was defeated in the House?

[Stingray]

I actually put a lot of time into writing a long and well thought out reply. I then deleted it, because it was sure to piss off at least a few people who I consider to be friends. In the end I  decided to just post something about bacon instead. I like bacon.

-S

[shmokes]

Nothing makes me madder than bacon...

[RetroJames]

What about Holiday Bacon?

[Stingray]

Nothing makes me madder than bacon...

Yeah, but I don't care if I piss you off.

-S