Attacking Lies
It should be easy enough to determine if Congress saw the same intelligence as the White House. Can't we just go back and look at the intelligence? They have to keep all that stuff, don't they? They can't throw it away. All the pre-war intelligence should still be available, and it could be examined.
Also, one fruitful avenue to explore, I think, is in the administration's attitudes leading up to the war. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that Bush decided to go war independent of any intelligence, even soon after he took office in early 2001. As Ray McGovern, a former analyst with the CIA said, "The decision to make war on Iraq pre-dated the intelligence. It was made at the latest in the spring of 2002 – intelligence had not yet spoken [at that point]." And the Downing Street memos said that the facts were being fixed around the policy. All this doesn't sound like a commander-in-chief with an open mind, who would have responded well to resistance, or to the word "no." It doesn't sound like a commander-in-chief who wanted to exhaust all his options for peace, and use war as a last resort. But that is what he was saying in public. Doesn't that alone constitute lying to the American people? Doesn't that alone constitute misleading us into war?
Background: Murtha speaks out (Post, CNN) --- Bush/Cheney on the attack (Post) --- Another attack (Post) --- Cheney attacks (NYT) --- Democrats are not all bad (Post)
Wrongs of the New Millennium
So Bush was wrong about WMDs. Now 2000+ are dead, $200 billion is spent, 15,000+ wounded and maimed, with no end in sight. Pretty expensive mistake. Don't we pay the president to get it right? Isn't this mistake alone enough to condemn him? Other people and countries -- including the oft-maligned French -- were telling him he was wrong. He ignored them all. He was determined to go to war, no matter what the real threats were. He did not use war as a last resort, as he said he would. I think that ignoring the truth, along with sending men into battle with faulty intelligence ought to be a punishable offense.
I know that if I cost our country 2000 lives and $200 billion I would be in big trouble. The president should be in big trouble. Getting it wrong ought to matter and it ought to have consequences. Getting it wrong certainly has had consequences for the 2000+ dead and the 15,000+ wounded and maimed. It certainly has consequences for all our citizens and for our economy. President Bush seems to be trying to pass the buck. Where does the buck stop? Don't we need to get people in there who don't make the kinds of mistakes that George W. Bush makes? Hmmm?
They got it wrong on pre-war intelligence, wrong on Katrina, wrong on tax cuts for the rich, wrong on cuts in benefits for the poor, wrong on burgeoning deficits. How much else are they wrong about? How long are we going to take it? George W. Bush and the Republicans are just Wrong for America.
It should be easy enough to determine if Congress saw the same intelligence as the White House. Can't we just go back and look at the intelligence? They have to keep all that stuff, don't they? They can't throw it away. All the pre-war intelligence should still be available, and it could be examined.
Also, one fruitful avenue to explore, I think, is in the administration's attitudes leading up to the war. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that Bush decided to go war independent of any intelligence, even soon after he took office in early 2001. As Ray McGovern, a former analyst with the CIA said, "The decision to make war on Iraq pre-dated the intelligence. It was made at the latest in the spring of 2002 – intelligence had not yet spoken [at that point]." And the Downing Street memos said that the facts were being fixed around the policy. All this doesn't sound like a commander-in-chief with an open mind, who would have responded well to resistance, or to the word "no." It doesn't sound like a commander-in-chief who wanted to exhaust all his options for peace, and use war as a last resort. But that is what he was saying in public. Doesn't that alone constitute lying to the American people? Doesn't that alone constitute misleading us into war?
Background: Murtha speaks out (Post, CNN) --- Bush/Cheney on the attack (Post) --- Another attack (Post) --- Cheney attacks (NYT) --- Democrats are not all bad (Post)
Wrongs of the New Millennium
So Bush was wrong about WMDs. Now 2000+ are dead, $200 billion is spent, 15,000+ wounded and maimed, with no end in sight. Pretty expensive mistake. Don't we pay the president to get it right? Isn't this mistake alone enough to condemn him? Other people and countries -- including the oft-maligned French -- were telling him he was wrong. He ignored them all. He was determined to go to war, no matter what the real threats were. He did not use war as a last resort, as he said he would. I think that ignoring the truth, along with sending men into battle with faulty intelligence ought to be a punishable offense.
I know that if I cost our country 2000 lives and $200 billion I would be in big trouble. The president should be in big trouble. Getting it wrong ought to matter and it ought to have consequences. Getting it wrong certainly has had consequences for the 2000+ dead and the 15,000+ wounded and maimed. It certainly has consequences for all our citizens and for our economy. President Bush seems to be trying to pass the buck. Where does the buck stop? Don't we need to get people in there who don't make the kinds of mistakes that George W. Bush makes? Hmmm?
They got it wrong on pre-war intelligence, wrong on Katrina, wrong on tax cuts for the rich, wrong on cuts in benefits for the poor, wrong on burgeoning deficits. How much else are they wrong about? How long are we going to take it? George W. Bush and the Republicans are just Wrong for America.
posted by Ed Bremson, MFA @ 9:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home