- Banned
- #81
the fact remains.... Team Bush told us repeatedly that there was NO DOUBT that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's...Team Bush told us repeatedly that there were CERTAIN that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's...the intelligence contained no such certainty....no such total absence of doubt...therefore... to convey such certainty, such absence of doubt when none existed was MISLEADING...and clearly...the caveats and qualifiers attached to the intelligence were NOT hidden from Team Bush... so their expressions of CERTAINTY...their expressions of a TOTAL LACK OF DOUBT were knowingly false. or....LIES.How do you determine that it was intentionally misleading?
Here was the situation. Saddam had ties with known terror groups directly and with al queda loosely (meetings to discuss placement of terror camps within Iraqi borders). Saddam had a stockpile of weapons that the UN had stamped and declared there during the first gulf war. Saddam was reported to be trying to gain nuclear capabilities. Saddam was a sworn enemy of the US.
So in 2002, when America is less than a year from being attacked on 9/11 by Al Queda members, Bush was presented this intelligence. Now he had the decision to make. In the post 9/11 world, any nation that harbored terrorists and specifically had dealings with Al queda members had to be dealt with. Does he attempt to continue negotiations with Saddam to disarm or does he threaten the use of force to make him disarm?
As it turned out he attempted negotiations one last time. He went to the UN to demand that they enforce the sanctions on Iraq that had been in place for at that time 12 years. When Saddam refused, war was inevitable. Bush couldnt take the chance that the intelligence was incomplete. He had the sources from the CIA, Europe, the UN, Russia, all saying the same things. That he had weapons and he had ties with terrorist organizations. So had Bush not acted with this knowledge looking him in the face, it would have been dangerous to national security. He did the exact right thing at the time based on the intelligence he was given.
Now the operation of the war itself has been shoddy at best. Not going in full force and eliminating the enemy to the last man was a mistake. OVerwhelming force is the only way to win a war. Instead they tried to fight it with kid gloves and show the world that we are kinder and gentler while attacking a country. War is not a kids game. You can't do it kindly. You go in, destroy everything vital to the enemy and then once the enemy is thouroughly destroyed, you work on the cleanup. There was too much politics involved trying to make us not be seen as big mean Americans. Ironically it turns out that we are seen as big mean Americans AND we have a mismanaged war.
So to sum up, Bush did not intentionally mislead. That is an opinion by some and is no more provable then you can prove someone's thoughts on the weather. Bush made the decision he had to make based on the intelligence he was presented, the timeframe and the enemy he faced. I don't know how i would have handled it myself and i certainly am glad i wasnt the one having to make the decision.