Faulty Intelligence

Returning SoldiersMy pacifist sensibilities have been challenged ever since the Bush Administration and 9/11 crossed paths.  Today brought an article by the Senate Intelligence committee regarding the misuse of intelligence by the Bush Administration to justify the Iraq War, something that the media has reported for some time now.  That the majority of the committee members are from one party, you can be sure that the minority party would claim bias.

The report shows an administration that “led the nation to war on false premises,” said the committee’s Democratic Chairman, Sen. John Rockefeller of West Virginia. Several Republicans on the committee protested its findings as a “partisan exercise.”

The Republican members of the committee insisted that the report demonstrated that Bush administration statements were backed by intelligence and “it was the intelligence that was faulty,” a statement which to me tries to deflect the Administration’s accountability for its resulting actions.

Faulty intelligence?  Wouldn’t we also call that stupidity?  I wrote some time ago that pre-war planning for an Iraq invasion began shortly after President Bush took office, prior to 9/11, perhaps because “Saddam tried to kill my daddy“.  I still find this to be one of the more legitimate reasons for rushing headlong to war without regard to getting it right or wrong.  It’s the one truth that President Bush has spoken that stands up to the subsequent evidence.

This Administration had intelligence that was wrong about weapons of mass destruction, wrong about ties between Saddam Hussein and terrorists, wrong about the Iraqis greeting the American troops with open arms, wrong about the invasion being cheap and easy, wrong about the $50 to 60 billion cost for the war, and wrong about bringing the shining beacon of Democracy to the Middle East.

So am I wrong to think less of this Administration than all the other Administrations I’ve lived through?

I think not.

Advertisements

2 Responses to Faulty Intelligence

  1. joe says:

    “So am I wrong to think less of this Administration than all the other Administrations I’ve lived through?

    I think not.”

    Let me ask sincerely. How does this compare to, let’s say, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, or say, Watergate, or 444 Days of captivity, or, “Go to the Moon because it’s ha(r)d” (as opposed to, “Because it’s the cold war, stupid.”), or “Read my lips, no new taxes!” or “Poland is not under the communist thumb.” or “The meaning of ‘is’ is…”.
    You get the idea.

    Sigh. Which administration is immune from the judgements of history? Probably not. Certainly, there is no immunity from the judgement of contemporaries.

    So not in rebuttal, but to present something for consideration, I ask if Lincoln “told the truth”, too.

    Not everyone was enthralled with Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, even in the North. The Chicago Times, a Democratic newspaper and longtime critic of Lincoln, thought he exploited the cemetery dedication for political purposes. In an editorial written a few days after the Gettysburg ceremony, the Times argued that Union soldiers fought only to defend the Constitution and Union against rebellious citizens, and not, as Lincoln asserted, to inaugurate “a new birth of freedom” for blacks as well as whites. Most northern, Democratic newspapers simply ignored the president’s brief remarks or joined the Chicago Times in criticizing Lincoln for his partisanship and for siding with the “negro” as the equal of whites.

  2. jay says:

    With all the oil ties that this administration has both in personnel and in professional experiences, I have to believe that this administration was looking for any fig leaf to use ( daddy’s gonna die) in order to seize the Iraqi oil fields. Somewhere in this government or in the oil companies there had to be forecasts of what would happen to the demand for oil and the resultant price increases when China and India became industrialized and began importing huge amounts of oil. The free market system would have to respond with increased prices and competition for this resource. We are all aware of what happened when China began to look for secure oil supplies in Africa and South America. Iraq was invaded to hedge our energy interests in both supply and price. Unfortunately no country likes to be occupied

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: