President Takes Responsibility for Wrongheaded Invasion of Iraq!

[RJnAbbysNana]

President Takes Responsibility for Wrongheaded Invasion of Iraq!

by Karen Kwiatkowski
LewRockwell.com
December 16, 2005


If you thought the devil was behind it, you’ve confused a couple blatant liars who strut when they walk!

Bush did it!

After well over three years of lying, prevaricating, misleading, and confusing the American people, after killing, maiming and destroying the livelihoods of tens of thousands of Iraqis and Americans at a healthy 20-to-1 ratio, and after the unprecedented destruction of Iraq’s infrastructure, let the record show, on December 14, 2005, Dubya said "I am responsible!"

And as a loyal and patriotic American, let me be the first to say, it wasn’t his fault. And even if it was his fault, he’s already said he’s glad he did it, and he’s going to keep doing it until he is good and ready to stop doing it!

Truth be told, that darn intelligence community fed him the wrong headlines! A good and decent President only reads headlines, and he should only have to read the simple ones that please him and make him smile. Why couldn’t the CIA get it right?

cont..........

http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski136.html

Shalom, salaam and peace be with you!

RJnAbbysNana

[rodeodance]

1. this is good short paragraph!

.....Truth be told, that darn intelligence community fed him the wrong headlines! A good and decent President only reads headlines, and he should only have to read the simple ones that please him and make him smile. Why couldn’t the CIA get it right?

[RJnAbbysNana]

2. Did you read the entire article?

I so loved the sarcasm of the author.

Regards,

RJnAbbysNana

[kliljedahl]

3. The "intelligence'" he used was not from the CIA

despite that sycophant "director". The only "intelligence" he used was cherry picked & stovepiped. When they mention faulty intelligence they hope most will assume, & most do, that it came from a legitimate intelligence source.



Keith’s Barbeque Central

[RJnAbbysNana]

4. "Legitimate Intelligence Source?"

I'm beginning to wonder what that is, my friend. Or is that an oxymoron?

Regards,

RJnAbbysNana

[kliljedahl]

6. By that I meant most assumed the CIA

People are so brainwashed that's the first thing they think. The "intelligence" * used didn't come from them, that's all I meant.


Keith’s Barbeque Central

[RJnAbbysNana]

8. I was just being a smartass!

n/t

[cliss]

5. Well, did anybody expect him to back down?

Not on your life! Not my Bush. I say the more outrageous you are, the more your chances of success.

And in the event you fail, be a REAL big-mouth and obscene about it. Bush obviously follows that advice.

[RJnAbbysNana]

7. Would you like to "borrow" some sarcasm for your post?

There's this:



or this:



Regards,

RJnAbbysNana

[katinmn]

9. She's got the insider's view. Great article.

K&N

[neoblues]

10. Actually... (or also)

Bush didn't actually admit anything.

What he said:

1. "It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong,"

2. "As president, I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq, and I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities."

Notes:

The first (#1 above) statement "admits" someone else made a mistake (though, it doesn't even use the word "mistake").

The second (#2 above) has two parts.

The first of which "admits" nothing more than what we all know--that he made the official decision to "go into IRAQ" (it doesn't say anything about the reasons for or quality the decision)(and interestingly, it avoids even calling a spade, a spade--in that it says "go into" rather than "start a war with" or "launch an invasion"). Indeed, it's basically meaningless to admit responsibility for simply making a decision when such decisions are a required part of your job. In particular, it didn't say "responsible" for "making a bad (foolish, illadvised, stupid, insane, egomaniacal, criminal, etc) decision"... that might have meant something. (Consider too that moments later he goes on to defend the decision as being the right one for... oh, so many reasons (a different one for every criticism)).

The second part seems to say he's "taking responsibility" for "what went wrong" (cleverly avoiding the negative sounding word "problem"). However, it actually says he's doing nothing more than taking responsibility to arrange for "fixing" the problem. He is decidedly not taking responsibility for the supposed error. The sentence also conveys the idea "taking responsibility"..."for what went wrong" just a second after we hear the word "IRAQ". Obviously, he's not taking responsibility for what went wrong in IRAQ (though, that's a part of what people seem to have "thought" they heard), and only plans to "fix" the source of the so-called "wrong" intelligence. There too he gets too much credit--his big plan(?) is merely to order someone else to develop a plan to "reform" the intelligence agency involved (gee, he's going to really have to think/work hard to pull that enormous task off).

It seems that by the mere fact that he mentions the words "responsibility", "intelligence", "IRAQ" and "what went wrong" in proximity to each other... I've heard the press and other say "Bush takes blame for using faulty intelligence", and "President takes responsibility for wrongheaded invasion of IRAQ", with which I must respectfully (or not) disagree.

I could write another couple of pages on all the subtlety and implications and on why they work now and/or what we need to be aware of or do to see through them...
I'll let it go with the observation that this whole story merely allows Bush to frame the issues involved in such a way that it actually precludes even thinking about the fact that the Bush Administration not only didn't get flawed (or merely "wrong") intelligence, but in fact cherry-picked, manufactured, manipulated and exaggerated the intelligence/evidence--in other words, the "fixed" the intelligence around their intentions to make war. Sure, he'll use the "excuse" that there was bad intelligence to let people think he's made a mistake, if that keeps them out of his hair, and besides, it gives him all the more power to further remake our intelligence agencies "in his own image". Nevertheless, while no one seems to care enough to do anything about it, and a great many simply won't recognize the truth when it's in plain view, Congress and the American people were decieved and lied to in order to pursue an illegal, reckless war (to establish power in the oil producing nations)(and if some oil just fell into our tankers, that'd be okay too). This issue deserves much more attention (investigation followed by presecutions).

Rest assured (or unsecured), Bush is not, in any way, contrite, or admitting any errors or mistakes (after all, it's impossible for him to believe he's ever wrong)(one imagines this could be due to his direct connection to the 'big guy' upstairs or whatever). He's also not going to update or adapt his approach like a true leader either, remember--he's the blindly "stay the course" come h_ll, high-water or the end of the world as we know it.