Two highly classified intelligence reports delivered directly to President Bush before the Iraq war cast doubt on key public assertions made by the president, Vice President Cheney, and other administration officials as justifications for invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein, according to records and knowledgeable sources.
Has Larry Elder seen this article?
2006-03-02
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
"Has Larry Elder seen this article?"
I don't know. Why don't you call his show tonight and ask him? He's on from 9pm-12am, 1400am.
I'm sure he'd love to hear from you.
Once again, Nadir, I remind you that lots of people had various predictions about invading Iraq. Some of the people who accurately predicted a protracted counter-revolution comprised of waring factions also inaccuratly predicted such non-events as a protracted and costly toppling of the Baathist (including use of those banned weapons), and elections marked by extreme violence and low turnout.
Many advisors insisted to Lincoln that the suppression of the confederacy would take a few months no loss of blood.
What reason do we have for "knowing" which of the competing advice was correct? The only thing that doesn't change is the righteousness or wrongheadedness underlyling the effort. Surely even if these critics were as wrong about the counter-revolution as they were about the ease of dispatching the baathist army and staging elections, you and Tom would still oppose Bush's invasion. Was opposing the confederacy "wrong" because it directly caused the deaths of 600,000 combatants (and just as many civilians, including blacks)?
Post a Comment