unrepentent…

Posted on Tuesday 9 December 2008


The Deluder in Chief
Published: December 7, 2008

We long ago gave up hope that President Bush would acknowledge his many mistakes, or show he had learned anything from them. Even then we were unprepared for the epic denial that Mr. Bush displayed in his interview with ABC News’s Charles Gibson the other day, which he presumably considered an important valedictory chat with the American public as well.

It was bad enough when Mr. Bush piously declared that he hopes Americans believe he is a guy who “didn’t sell his soul for politics.” (We suppose we should not bother remembering how his team drove Senator John McCain out of the 2000 primaries with racist attacks or falsified Senator John Kerry’s war record in 2004.)

It was skin crawling to hear him tell Mr. Gibson that the thing he will really miss when he leaves office is no longer going to see the families of slain soldiers, because they make him feel better about the war. But Mr. Bush’s comments about his decision to invade Iraq were a “mistakes were made” rewriting of history and a refusal to accept responsibility to rival that of Richard Nixon.

At one point, Mr. Bush was asked if he wanted any do-overs. “The biggest regret of the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq,” he said. “A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction” were cause for war.

After everything the American public and the world have learned about how Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney manipulated Congress, public opinion and anyone else they could bully or lie to, Mr. Bush is still acting as though he decided to invade Iraq after suddenly being handed life and death information on Saddam Hussein’s arsenal.

The truth is that Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had been chafing to attack Iraq before Sept. 11, 2001. They justified that unnecessary war using intelligence reports that they knew or should have known to be faulty. And it was pressure from the White House and a highly politicized Pentagon that compelled people like Secretary of State Colin Powell and George Tenet, the Central Intelligence director, to ignore the counter-evidence and squander their good names on hyped claims of weapons of mass destruction.

Despite it all, Mr. Bush said he will “leave the presidency with my head held high.” And, presumably, with his eyes closed to all the disasters he is dumping on the American people and his successor.

Sunday’s New York Times contains an editorial expressing inaccurate and incomplete statements on pre-war intelligence and the war in Iraq.

While the President has repeatedly acknowledged the mistakes in the pre-war intelligence, there is no support for the Times’ claim that the President and his national security team "knew or should have known [the intelligence] to be faulty" or that "pressure from the White House" led to particular conclusions. Nothing in the many inquiries conducted into these matters supports the view of the Times’ Editorial Board. Indeed, the independent Silberman-Robb Commission and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded that no political pressure was brought to bear on the Intelligence Community.

As the President has stated, he regrets the intelligence was wrong, but it was intelligence that members of Congress, foreign governments as well as the Administration all believed to be accurate. Working with Congress, the President has since put in place a number of intelligence reform measures to try to ensure that such mistakes do not happen again.

While Saddam Hussein did not have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, he was a threat, and his removal has opened the door to a democratic Iraq in the heart of the Middle East that is an ally of the United States.

The New York Times continues to have difficulty acknowledging the undeniable success of the President’s decision to surge an additional 30,000 troops into Iraq. Because of the surge, Iraq is a more stable and secure country. It is the success of the surge that is allowing American troops to withdraw from Iraq and return home with a record of heroic service and still unheralded success.
[1] The Invasion of Iraq was unjustified: Using the 9/11 attack on New York by al Qaeda as an excuse, Bush invaded Iraq for three reasons, all of which were false:
    [A] Iraq was an emminent danger to America.
    [B] Iraq was involved with Terrorists [al Qaeda].
    [C] Iraq was building and stockpiling Weapons of Mass destruction.
[2] The Invasion of Iraq was bad idea: Invading Iraq destabilized Iraq and opened it up to Terrorists. Invading Iraq destroyed America’s reputation in the world.
[3] The Invasion of Iraq was poorly executed: All Military experts suggested 400,000+ Troops for invasion and stabilization. We sent 150,000 and let the insurgency develop.
[4] The Invasion of Iraq was unnecessarily prolonged: After successfully vanquishing the Iraq Army, we disbanded it and then spent four years doing nothing while the insurgency became established.
[5] The Invasion of Iraq was a political assassination: We invaded a country and assassinated its President. We don’t do that.
[6] The Invasion of Iraq and "the surge" was immaterial: In the scope of history, Iraq will be only a blot on our finances and record. It will have no long term significance, and "surging" so we could leave with honor rather than with our tails between our legs just got more of our children killed.
[7] The Invasion of Iraq will haunt Bush and Hadley to their graves: When someone does something very wrong, it haunts them no matter what they say or even what they think. If Bush leaves office with a clear conscience, it’s only because he doesn’t have one [a conscience].

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.