INDC Journal

« Might I Suggest A Compromise? (UPDATED with Dissent from Bill. Also, Pillowfighting) | Main | Quick Links »

November 14, 2005
Must-Reads from Goldstein

Posted by Bill

On Patriotism, redux:

I do in fact believe that the WMD accusations against Bush have been dispositively disproven, though not simply because the Senate Intelligence Committee rejected them. Bush gets intelligence reports, he doesn’t pore through raw intelligence data, and so his understanding of intelligence comes from his national security analysts. Anyone who thinks Bush looked at his analysts’ reports and rejected them because he wanted to avenge Daddy or enrich his oil buddies is either terribly confused or purposely dishonest—blinded by their hatred for the President. Those who are confused aren’t unpatriotic; they are, however, ignorant on this point, and are earnestly playing the part of useful idiots. Those who do know how intelligence works—and yet continue to suggest that Bush lied or manipulated intelligence in order to take us to war—are more concerned with damaging the Bush presidency than they are with winning the war.

And the follow-up ...

On Patriotism, redux -- a final response to Glenn Greewald

Posted by Bill at November 14, 2005 01:58 PM | TrackBack (2)

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.indcjournal.com/cgi-bin/mt/dafrules/tapaz.cgi/2137

Comments

The part that's mind-boggling is the "We had a plan to invade Iraq _before_ 9/11" claim.

Its from the Land of Duh.
As a pro-Defense person, I'd expect that we have _some_ plan for invading every single country on the CIA's 'State Sponsor of Terrorism' list, a plan for Taiwan/China, a plan to assist Japan/South Korea, an invasion plan for North Korea. Probably a slew of plans for various African countries too.

There's a difference between 'a plan', 'a detailed plan', and 'what happened'.

I can see Al Gore having a cow that we actually have a plan (or three) for invading, say, Cuba. But hey - that's precisely what's cost the D's two Presidential elections. You have a problem when "being prepared" is equated with "being overly threatening".

Posted by: Al at November 14, 2005 03:48 PM

It's all about how you parse it:

Did we have a plan to invade Iraq before 9/11? Of course we did. Do we have a plan to invade Venezuala? Iran? Of course we do. That's basic armed forces prep.

Did we PLAN on invading Iraq before 9/11? Was this part of Bush's first term agenda? Magic 8-Ball says: Signs point to yes. To take the counterfactual, even without a major terror attack on American soil Bush would have tried his hardest to convince the nation to invade Iraq. For democracy, for oil, for daddy, for whatever; the intent was there.

Posted by: moebius at November 14, 2005 04:47 PM

it really is pushing things to say bush "lied." even if there was manipulation (be it intentional manipulation, or more of a post-9/11 'don't these signs all look ominous now' kind of mindset) i don't believe bush was conciously aware of it. if the the failure to recruit a larger coalition of the willing made him pause at any point.

Posted by: milowent at November 14, 2005 04:55 PM

Moebius:

even without a major terror attack on American soil Bush would have tried his hardest to convince the nation to invade Iraq.

It would be useful if you provided some actual evidence in support of these self-serving lefty talking points.

Posted by: Sinbad at November 14, 2005 06:31 PM

Sinbad:

Because Bush is an evil Chimpy Shrub.

QED.

Posted by: Jeff G at November 14, 2005 07:35 PM

Moebius, you start to make sense but rapidly abandon it and dive off the side of the cliff into lunacy. George Bush went into office in January 2001 intending to make his mark in the Presidency in domestic policy. This was very clear by his early moves in office. The Bush administration was gearing up for its domestic policy agenda especially on tax policy. And in fact, during the finger pointing immediately after 9/11, Clinton officials claimed that few people in the Bush administration were interested in their foreign policy / terrorism discussions either with respect to Iraq or Al Queda. Some of that was their pathetic excuses for their own nearly 8 years of inaction but obviously they were observing the relative priorities of the Bush appointees.

Thinking that there was some ulterior plan on George Bush's part to invade Iraq is just complete stupidity at best, and most likely just rabid insanity.

Posted by: Robin Roberts at November 14, 2005 10:08 PM

Posted by: viagra viagra at November 13, 2006 06:00 PM

Posted by: buy viagra at November 16, 2006 01:06 PM

vcfjoldk zerp chxlod miuz qylcm xqewav evwcnyfsa

Posted by: phkejxiuv qhnfrykmd at January 14, 2007 03:36 AM

Nice resource, very interesting reading. http://s1u.net/inob

Posted by: Cellphone at April 12, 2007 09:40 PM

Record company EMI sign a deal with the estate of crooner Dean Martin to use the singer's likeness...

Posted by: Ricardo Irvin at April 16, 2007 07:43 AM

Record company EMI sign a deal with the estate of crooner Dean Martin to use the singer's likeness...

Posted by: Ricardo Irvin at April 16, 2007 07:44 AM

The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Posted by: Jakobe Redding at April 16, 2007 05:06 PM

Veteran actor William Franklyn, known for voicing the 1960s Schweppes TV adverts, dies aged 81...

Posted by: Javon Colwell at April 17, 2007 03:14 AM

Veteran actor William Franklyn, known for voicing the 1960s Schweppes TV adverts, dies aged 81...

Posted by: Javon Colwell at April 17, 2007 03:15 AM

Veteran actor William Franklyn, known for voicing the 1960s Schweppes TV adverts, dies aged 81...

Posted by: Javon Colwell at April 17, 2007 03:15 AM

-
av

Search

Extras
PDA

RSD
Atom
RSS 2.0
RSS 1.0

Credits
Movable Type