Bush Lied?

Finally a MSM source has produced an excellent article regarding the Bush Administration's case for going to war with Iraq! The editorial in today's Chicago Tribune (28.12.05) clearly answers the questions of whether "Bush lied" or rather, his critics who performed masterful deception. In doing this, the Trib's writers began an inquest:
We set out to assess the Bush administration's arguments for war in Iraq. We have weighed each of those nine arguments against the findings of subsequent official investigations by the 9/11 Commission, the Senate Intelligence Committee and others. We predicted that this exercise would distress the smug and self-assured--those who have unquestioningly supported, or opposed, this war.

After all this, what do the editors have to conclude?
After reassessing the administration's nine arguments for war, we do not see the conspiracy to mislead that many critics allege. Example: The accusation that Bush lied about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs overlooks years of global intelligence warnings that, by February 2003, had convinced even French President Jacques Chirac of "the probable possession of weapons of mass destruction by an uncontrollable country, Iraq." We also know that, as early as 1997, U.S. intel agencies began repeatedly warning the Clinton White House that Iraq, with fissile material from a foreign source, could have a crude nuclear bomb within a year.

Furthermore, the Trib systematically lays out all 9 arguments and provides a point-counterpoint of the White House statements, what actually happened and the verdict. Here's an example:
Reform in the Middle East

Supplanting Hussein's reign with self-rule would transform governance in a region dominated by dictators, zealots and kings. The administration wanted to convert populations of subjects into citizens. Mideast democracy would channel energy away from resentments that breed terrorism.

U.S. pressure has stirred reforms in Lebanon, Egypt and Saudi Arabia and imperiled Syria's regime. "I was cynical about Iraq," said Druze Muslim patriarch Walid Jumblatt. "But when I saw the Iraqi people voting . . . it was the start of a new Arab world... The Berlin Wall has fallen."

The notion that invading Iraq would provoke political tremors in a region long ruled by despots is the Bush administration's most successful prewar prediction to date. A more muscular U.S. diplomacy has advanced democracy and assisted freedom movements in the sclerotic Middle East.

It is an EXCELLENT article and worth your time reading. After all, we are better off reading this because we know there are certain anti-everything groups that refuse to believe anything that doesn't agree with their feelings and sentiments!

Read the full editorial: Judging the Case for War!

1 comment:

Christopher Robert said...

regardless, it still does not change the fact that I dislike him because of his view on social issues and the fact that he would force his extreme religious views on me.