Quote:
Originally Posted by n david
Let's not forget, it wasn't W or his administration that first talked of war against Iraq, nor was he or his administration the first to talk about WMD's.
Need we revisit the pages of quotes available from the Clinton years and from Democrats who demanded action before the second Iraq War began? I'm sick of hearing this absolute garbage about W's admin "playing so dirty" or lying about WMDs, etc.
The intelligence he - along with Clinton and several Democratic and Republican Congressmen - relied on was terrible.
W's not to blame for the intelligence, nor for the lack of WMDs, nor for playing dirty as you say.
|
Actually most of this dates back to the first Bush administration when Wolfowitz and then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney drafted a paper illustrating the necessity of removing Saddam. A mass media campaign designed to shift public opinion in favor of the war was also discussed. It was then reviewed and opposed by then General Joint Cheif of Staff Colin Powell. Then the document was revised to merely express our position as a denunciation of Saddam's regime. It's actually a very interesting chain of events. The Iraq War was something that was being prepared back under Present Herbert Walker Bush. In fact he wanted to press forward and get the job done then, but backed off for political reasons.
And it is true that the Clinton Administration also supported regime change. However, they took a softer approach to Iraq and so actual regime change was put on the back burner. Interestingly enough, most of the Homeland Security strategies we have come to use were discussed at length under the Clinton Administration after the Oklahoma City bombing. Of course after 911 these strategies were beefed up a bit. For example Clinton favored wire tapping (which he now denies) and a national security agency focused on the homeland. But at the time civil liberties groups cried out against the Clinton Administration's positions and the process was again...back burnered.
It seems they (both Republicans and Democrats) do NOTHING until they absolutely have to.
As far as WMD intel being terrible... I thin the CIA is being a scapegoat on this one. Too many agents decried the information the Bush Administration presented. Some even quietly stepped down because of it. I believe the Bush Administration was engaging in a "Northwoods" type misinformation strategy in the environment that that 9/11 provided.
I understand that sometimes the government needs to lie to us and misinform us to protect us. My question is, was it justified or necessary?