Dead Wrong: Preemption

[orwell]

Why is nobody talking about how today's report should put the torch to Bush's radical new centerpiece of military policy known as preemption.

If we can now attack before we are attacked based on what we project may happen in the future, and if that projection is based on intelligence, are we willing to put lives at stake when our intelligence is "dead wrong". What is next, war based on "gut feelings", looking into someone's soul, Psychic Friend's Network?

My guess is that the intel "wet work" boys will be increasingly called on to cause "an incident" to justify the next advance by the Imperium. No longer can we rely on the Colin or Condo"lie"za show to fully rationalize letting the dogs of war out.

So let's look at today's report as the full employment act for goons, thugs, murderers, and psy-ops boys in the CIA and our newly empowered Negroponte storm troopers.

From now on it's "show me the bloodshed".

[RaleighNCDUer]

1. This report is a lie upon a lie.

Intel said there was no threat. Repeatedly.

Rumsfeld formed OSP to give him the intel he wanted, and pressured Tenet to agree with it.

The problem wasn't bad intelligence. The problem was bad leadership.

and, BTW

What do you think 9/11 was?

[orwell]

2. MIHOP n/t

[orwell]

3. Dumb Intel

BTW...I think you miss my point. I know that everyone is lying their asses off. My point is that by their own logic they have negated preemption.

In other words, if you claim the right to justify war through preemption, you must necessarily have very accurate intelligence.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Didn't you see the memo? "To Iraq: Oops. My Bad. xoxo USA"

[orwell]

5. LOL

To use a golfing term...do we ask for "a mulligan"?