Bush Tries to White-Wash History; Portrays Himself as a Victim
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/111104/
Even after all this time, Bush views the Iraq War with regret not
over
anything he did, but rather, over something that was done to him.
It's
tiresome to need to point this out at this late date but, yes, George
W. Bush and his administration misled the country while making the
case for war with Iraq and, remarkably, are still trying to mislead
people about it. In a Dec. 1 interview with ABC News' Charlie Gibson,
Bush said that "the biggest regret" of his presidency was "the
intelligence failure in Iraq."

In other words, his biggest regret wasn't regret over anything he did
but rather regret over something that was done to him, a vague
"intelligence failure" rather than a misguided decision to invade
another country. Bush explained that "a lot of people put their
reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a
reason to remove Saddam Hussein. It wasn't just people in my
administration; a lot of members in Congress, prior to my arrival in
Washington, D.C., during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of
nations around the world were all looking at the same intelligence."


This is, even by Bush standards, a pretty breathtaking revision of
history. In fact, very few members of Congress looked at the
intelligence -- Thomas Ricks reports in his book Fiasco that just
five
read the classified version of the National Intelligence Estimate on
Iraqi weapons of mass destruction capabilities. But had more members
taken the time, they would have found what Spencer Ackerman and John
Judis reported back in June of 2003 -- that the Bush administration
removed a number of caveats and contrary pieces of evidence from the
classified version of the estimate when producing a shorter,
unclassified version for public consumption. More curious
investigators might have been further interested in the fact,
reported
in the same piece, that even the more accurate classified version
represented a dramatic change in the intelligence community's
assessment of the Iraq situation. As Judis and Ackerman observe, when
George Tenet offered his January 2002 review of nuclear proliferation
issues "he did not even mention a nuclear threat from Iraq."


The main thing that changed over the course of 2002 wasn't anything
about the intelligence, it was the fact that the Bush administration
wanted to invade Iraq. Consequently, a new, more alarmist
intelligence
estimate was written up. Then a more alarmist redacted version was
released to the public. And the administration's public statements
were more alarming still. There were real intelligence failures here,
but they were and are dwarfed by the policy failure. This failure was
driven by administration hawks such as Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz,
and Doug Feith who appear to have embraced the deluded conspiracy
theories of American Enterprise Institute adjunct fellow Laurie
Mylroie (who thanks Wolfowitz in the introduction to her conspiracy-
mongering book) and Weekly Standard writer Stephen Hayes (who
followed
up his entry into the genre with an authorized biography of Dick
Cheney) who placed Saddam Hussein at the center of anti-American
terrorism around the globe.


This policy failure persisted, of course, up until the very moment at
which the decision to go to war was made. By that moment, though few
in the United States ever seem inclined to remember it, whatever
intelligence failures may or may not have occurred were irrelevant.
Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency and the U.N.
were on the ground in Iraq, chasing down leads and searching for
illicit weapons of mass destruction programs. They found some
missiles
whose ranges slightly exceeded what Iraq was permitted to have, and
the missiles were duly dismantled. And before the invasion began,
Mohammed El Barradei of the IAEA and Hans Blix, then a chief weapons
inspector for the U.N., were both telling the world that they'd found
no evidence of active weapons of mass destruction programs. Both told
the administration that if it had additional intelligence about
weapons of mass destruction, it ought to hand that information over
to
the inspectors so they could check it out.


12Next page ยป



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to