Bush accepts responsibility for war "based on faulty intel"

Forums: Politics, Iraq, George W Bush
Email this Topic • Print this Page

CNN article:

Quote:

"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said during his fourth and final speech before Thursday's vote for Iraq's parliament. "As president I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. And I'm also responsible for fixing what went wrong by reforming our intelligence capabilities. And we're doing just that."

"My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision," the president said. "Saddam was a threat and the American people, and the world is better off because he is no longer in power."

For the full article:
SOURCE

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 5,564 • Replies: 111

No top replies

"My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision," the president said. "Saddam was a threat and the American people, and the world is better off because he is no longer in power."

Yep.

0 Replies

Nope, nope, and nope.

0 Replies

"My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision," the president said. "Saddam was a threat and the American people, and the world is better off because he is no longer in power."

He just did a really really crappy job of it, and that's the problem.

0 Replies

Faulty intel the man says. It was the other guy not me. The truth is they gave him the intel he wanted to hear.
What a cop-out.
However, I must admit he is making some progress since he admits to being wrong even though he blames it on someone or something else.

0 Replies

The problem is that there are a lot of rulers the world would be better of without. How do we decide which ones to remove? I never felt that SH was a threat to the US. His interests were always in the Middle East and he was much more contained than those in power in Iran and Syria (for example).

I also don't think the US had poor intelligence. I think the intelligence we had was poorly interpreted because of a pre-existing bias that existed in White House. I feel that the President has yet to own up to that aspect of our intelligence "failure".

0 Replies

I wonder what Thankwgiving dinner was like with GHW and GW at the table.

GHW-'Said back ere in 92 that wouldnt be prudent to go into Bagdhad, costs too much, too many American lives , wed be there for a long time..
I said that back then ya dummy"

GW Shadamm needed ta be shown the door, bringin Democracy te the world 's HARD WORK

GHW-Like you ever did any
GHW , Now on, we call you Fredo

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

"My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision," the president said. "Saddam was a threat and the American people, and the world is better off because he is no longer in power."

Yep.

Based on that thought McG., should we now overthrow the governments of North Korea and Iran? And of course, the elephant in the room is China - if we conquer the People's Republic of Walmart we could bring Freedom to a substantial percentage of the world's population. World Freedom right?- that's the purpose of bankrupting the country and turning our troops into bloody roadside confetti.

0 Replies

Green Witch wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
"My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the right decision," the president said. "Saddam was a threat and the American people, and the world is better off because he is no longer in power."

Yep.

Based on that thought McG., should we now overthrow the governments of North Korea and Iran? And of course, the elephant in the room is China - if we conquer the People's Republic of Walmart we could bring Freedom to a substantial percentage of the world's population. World Freedom right?- that's the purpose of bankrupting the country and turning our troops into bloody roadside confetti.

Nope. That would a poor interpretation.

0 Replies

It's amazing. Everybody against the war has said the want Bush to say that he had bad intel. When he does say it they still aren't happy. You people are priceless.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

I wonder what Thankwgiving dinner was like with GHW and GW at the table.

GHW-'Said back ere in 92 that wouldnt be prudent to go into Bagdhad, costs too much, too many American lives , wed be there for a long time..
I said that back then ya dummy"

GW Shadamm needed ta be shown the door, bringin Democracy te the world 's HARD WORK

GHW-Like you ever did any
GHW , Now on, we call you Fredo

That is classic, Farmerman. Hilarious.

0 Replies

The US f@cked up big time. Unfortunately, since you broke it, you've got to stay and fix it, and pay for it. But the big kicker is, you don't have the ability to fix it. ie. the US f@cked up big time.

0 Replies

ralpheb wrote:

It's amazing. Everybody against the war has said the want Bush to say that he had bad intel. When he does say it they still aren't happy. You people are priceless.

I think you've confused the term "bad intelligence" with "badly lacking intelligence". Hope this helps you out.

0 Replies

I have made the offer before. Anybody who thinks they can do a better job? Run for president. The Job is open to all quaified appicants.

0 Replies

And all unqualified applicants as well, apparently.

0 Replies

ralpheb wrote:

I have made the offer before. Anybody who thinks they can do a better job? Run for president. The Job is open to all quaified appicants.

That's one of the most hilarious things you've ever written, ralph! "The job is open to all qualified applicants who can raise severeal hundred million dollars and get the backing of major corporations and hire a hundred experienced spinmeisters. Ordinary folk need not apply." You're in training to be a stand-up comic, aren't you?

0 Replies

Bushie is still spilling bad intelligence. "Saddam was a threat and the American people, and the world is better off because he is no longer in power." Saddam was not a threat and that's why the intelligence was wrong. In 2001 Condi and Powell both sais Saddam was weak, sanctions had worked, he was not a threat to his neighbors never mind America, and he had no WMD. Then the cherry picking started and intelligence was twisted to suit an agenda.

0 Replies

Rep. Murtha -- bless him -- made a comment today on Bush's speech. Old warrior that he is, he said, in effect, America has no business going to war to bring freedom to some other country. The only valid reason for American involvement in a war, he said, is if our own interests are somehow threatened. Now, I agree that Saddam Hussein was (and is) seven different kinds of son of a bitch and that being tried in open court is too kind a fate for him. But, as somebody else has already said, where do we draw the line in this 'nation-building' endeavor? Never mind North Korea and Iran, never mind even China. Are we going to unseat our allied leaders in Saudi Arabia? In Pakistan? There are more dictatorships than democracies on this planet. And some of those dictators claim to be our dearest friends. How was Iraq a danger to USA? Again, I detest Saddam. I'm only asking who appointed us to make these decisions.

0 Replies

ralpheb wrote:

It's amazing. Everybody against the war has said the want Bush to say that he had bad intel. When he does say it they still aren't happy. You people are priceless.

Uh, no. Not everybody has been saying they want him to admit to having bad intel. We knew he had bad intel in the Fall of 2002 and that it had been manipulated to fit the Right Wing agenda. Something about product rollouts not being good in August was a pretty darn big clue.

What many people have said is that they want him to admit to having had plans to invade Iraq,and remove Saddam PRIOR to 9/11 and that he took advantage of the 9/11 event to push through that agenda while people were scared shitless and not paying attention.

What many people have said is that they want him and Cheney to admit to manipulating the intel by threatening / intimidating those responsible for ollecting and analyzing threat information.

What many people have said is that they want him to admit that he surrounds himself with "yes men" that don't want to upset him and only tell him what he wants to hear.

What many people have said is that he's incapable of admitting mistakes, which is proven once again by his statement today that the bad intel was someone elses fault.

When he admits the intel was there that indicated Saddam was not a threat and that he purposely ignored it, let me know. I'll throw a party.

0 Replies

Al Franken , last week said that he was originally a war backer because who didnt trust Powell. Powell was like this "adult figure" who prevailed with what sounded like calm common sense. When Franken found out we were lied to, he became very pissed. But , like the ever decreasing circle of events that Wilso has stated so well, We will probably disappear up our own assholes cause we gotta fix it. Im ashamed to say buit , we have to stay . as foolish as that sounds.

Ive gone around with myself on this so many times. I first kearned of the bad intelligence from some Nuke geochron colleagues who run labs in Tennessee. I was stunned at the misrepresentation and actual manipulation that was done to us and Congress.

We have to impeach this sumbitch and his leader Dick.

0 Replies

Bush accepts responsibility for war "based on faulty intel"

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know