Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I disagree with "reckless" and your presumptive use of the word "know" in the last two sentences.
|
We can table "reckless" for the moment. If you think there wasn't substantial pressure on the intel agencies during the run-up to the war to come up with support for what the Admininistration wanted, you haven't been paying attention. I don't even know where to start on that one.
On the question of what Bush was told and what he said, I'll go back to an easy example for me to run down:
Quote:
- On Friday, September 6, Franks and Rumsfeld briefed the president and the NSC on the latest war planning. . . . General Franks had something important to add. "Mr. President," he said, "we've been looking for Scud missiles and other weapons of mass destruction for ten years and haven't found any yet, so I can't tell you that I know that there are any specific weapons anywhere. I haven't seen Scud one."
Plan of Attack 173
- [On Saturday, September 7,] Blair and Bush took questions from reporters. They said they were committed to ending Saddam's threat one and for all. How or when went unanswered. Bush asserted unequivocally, "Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction."
Plan of Attack 178
|
Bush's top general tells him they haven't found any WMD in ten years of looking, and the next day he's telling journalists -- unequivocally -- that Hussein has them.
I don't think Bush is stupid enough to screw that up -- do you?
