Procrustes Stretched
"intuition and imagination and intelligence"
I Want To Believe Karl Rove...but..,
~Dude
Does he address the accusations that the intelligence that went into the reports were doctored by, or caused to be doctored by admin officials?
Will I have to buy the book?
There is no debate individual Democrats accepted the reports they saw as valid (I do know Ted Kennedy and others were still cautioning about rushing into war even with the reports.). That argument is a straw man argument.
The reports vs the intelligence: I believe the WH believed the reports.
But the administration is compromised of more than the WH. Does Rove address the intelligence and how it may have been skewed to fit the desires or fears individuals had?
I can imagine a scenario where considering the pressures of the recent 911 attacks, underlings felt pressured to fit the intel to a certain view.
Rove's story in this news article is lacking way too much info to make an honest and informed decision on whether the WH/admin knew the intel was bogus.
I am not sure I believe all of what Rove is said to be asserting. I will have to buy the book.
dD
Forum policy on copyright and fair use, to be found HERE (like you don't already know it), prohibits the posting of entire pieces.March 3, 2010, 3:19 pm
Rove on Iraq: Without W.M.D. Threat, Bush Wouldnt Have Gone to War
By PETER BAKER
Karl Rove, the chief political adviser to President George W. Bush and architect of his two successful campaigns for the White House, says in a new memoir that his former boss probably would not have invaded Iraq had he known there were no weapons of mass destruction there.
Mr. Rove adamantly rejects allegations that the administration deliberately lied about the presence of weapons in Saddam Husseins Iraq. But he acknowledges that the failure to find them badly damaged Mr. Bushs presidency, and he blames himself for not countering the narrative that Bush lied, calling it one of the biggest mistakes of the Bush years.
<snip>
What many historians may focus on is his description of the war in Iraq, its origins and consequences. While many have accused the administration of drumming up a case for war on the back of false intelligence about Mr. Husseins weapons of mass destruction, or W.M.D., Mr. Rove maintains that the White House genuinely believed the reports, and pointed to Democrats who accepted them as valid as well.
Rove on Iraq: Without W.M.D. Threat, Bush Wouldnt Have Gone to War - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com
~Dude
Does he address the accusations that the intelligence that went into the reports were doctored by, or caused to be doctored by admin officials?
Will I have to buy the book?
There is no debate individual Democrats accepted the reports they saw as valid (I do know Ted Kennedy and others were still cautioning about rushing into war even with the reports.). That argument is a straw man argument.
The reports vs the intelligence: I believe the WH believed the reports.
But the administration is compromised of more than the WH. Does Rove address the intelligence and how it may have been skewed to fit the desires or fears individuals had?
I can imagine a scenario where considering the pressures of the recent 911 attacks, underlings felt pressured to fit the intel to a certain view.
Rove's story in this news article is lacking way too much info to make an honest and informed decision on whether the WH/admin knew the intel was bogus.
I am not sure I believe all of what Rove is said to be asserting. I will have to buy the book.
dD
Last edited: