Why isn't the president mad that he took us to war with bad intel?

[spanone]

Wouldn't this be a natural human response???? Wouldn't you want to assign blame???? Maybe, so it doesn't happen again?????

[jbfam4]

1. Good question

I thought the same thing on 9/11. That a normal reaction would be to be so angry that Bush would want an investigation right away to find out Why it happened. He fought the investigation all the way until he realized the people wanted it. If you don't want an investigation you must already know why it happened.

[spanone]

9. I'd be wanting to see Tenet's head roll down 16th avenue.

But bush* is standing by his man which tells me he doesn't give a shit about this country. Between now and March of next year (over a whole year) we will still be receiving intelligence from George Tenet.

[rocktivity]

15. "I strongly believe the CIA is ably led by George Tenet"

he told Tim Russert on Saturday. Then why the commission? If his intelligence sucked (as opposed to the Office Of Special Plans), why does he want to keep Tenet around--fear of what he can say?


rocknation

[laruemtt]

2. why would he be mad?

he wanted it come hell or high water - he was going to war - he couldn't care less if there was reason to go or not.

[emanymton]

3. OUTSTANDING Point!!!

One does have to wonder.

Of course the answer is he was happy to hear what he wanted to hear. Why does any one even try to believe what he says?


He lied, people died. ABB

[calimary]

7. Welcome to DU, and you are so spot-on.

Like your name, too!

But the point here is UBER-well-taken, if you will. Think back to any of our reactions, any of ANYBODY'S reactions to 9/11. Wasn't everybody pretty damned emotional? Angry? Hurt? Stunned? ESPECIALLY the right-wingers, of whom he's supposed to be one? The milquetoast reactions we get from him on this are astounding, and telling. And wouldn't ANY CEO, upon learning that there are serious fuckups in his/her staff, be demanding that heads roll, or MAKE them roll, him/herself? Shit, I've worked in little bitty offices and departments where people got fired for the least little thing, up to and including making the boss look bad or be forced to take heat. And NOTHING has been done. NOTHING. NOBODY'S been called on the carpet, NOBODY'S been sent packing, NOBODY'S been censured, NOBODY'S been taken out to the woodshed. NOBODY. NOTHING. NADA. It's just totally stunning.

[StClone]

4. He feigned it for a little while

But it didn't fit because he is a poor actor (no Reagan) and it's better to feed the incurious one bad info and have him go wild with that...much more convincing. His adorers, which themselves are perceptually challenged, then ape his thinking and support his actions.

[Faygo Kid]

5. That's not why he took us to war: WMDs, 9/11, liberating Iraqis: lies

He is not angry because he only used the "intelligence" as an excuse. He took us to war because of the neocon dream: Create a country in the Middle East (Iraq) that will assure American hegemony in the region, and hence control of its (the region's) oil. He (or his handlers, as today's Meet the Press interview so clearly demonstrated) never relied upon the WMD excuse. Wolfowitz, Perle, Cheney, Frum and the whole Project For a New American Century crowd have made it clear that this was an opportunity (insane) to control the Middle East. None of these people have a grasp of history. They do have a clear vision of raw power, however. But, to get back to your point, repeat after me: It was never about Iraqi WMDs. It was all about power, and not American power, but American power as exercised by a very narrow elite. Where is any evidence to the contrary?

[bacchant]

6. That would seem to be the response

if that's what really happened, but we know that's not what happened. They created and cooked the intel to fit their their plans. As with every scandal in the Bush administration, from 911 to Enron, heads don't roll because it always originates at the top. The hot potato is passed around in an orgy of ass covering.

[fleetus]

8. I heard that Bush gave Dick Cheney a spanking for lying to him.

:spank:

[TankLV]

10. Because he had a hard-on for going to war from before day one.

He wanted to go to war, no matter what.

Badly.

Very badly.

Almost foaming-at-the-mouth badly.

Any excuses would have done, just as long as he got to play toy soldiers with our real-live soldiers, and as long as he and his cronies weren't ever in any real danger themselves, or would have to pay any price for their decisions.

[nostamj]

11. resident pantload has no understanding

and no experience

with the concept of RESPONSIBILITY

it's utterly alien to him. like compassion and work ethic

[H2O Man]

12. Compare JFK & Bay of Pigs...

...to bush and his band of swine. Kennedy actually got bad advice, took full responsibility in public, and handled the situation firmly behind the scenes. Bush got okay advice, twisted it to fit his needs, denies responsibility and publicly blames others, and continues in private to institute his criminal goals.

[tabasco]

13. Good point.

JFK publicly took full responsibility even though the fiasco had been handed off from Eisenhower. Accepting responsibility is a leadership trait Chimpy is incapable of.

[SammyWinstonJack]

14. Been wondering the same thing

One would think that his being outraged that he was mislead on the intelligence would play more in his favor. :crazy:

[JPace]

16. For the same reason that he is not mad that people

are accusing him of being AWOL.

Because he is guilty!

[maggrwaggr]

17. was O.J. furious about the "real killers"??

Nah, he was out playing golf.