Posted on 01/13/2007 11:15:33 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
The president concedes that his decisions have led to more instability in Iraq. President Bush made the admission in an exclusive interview with Scott Pelley at Camp David yesterday (12), his first interview since addressing the nation about Iraq. It will be broadcast on 60 MINUTES Sunday, Jan. 14 (8:00-9:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.
The president says the current sectarian violence in Iraq, is a destabilizing factor that "could lead to attacks here in America" and must be controlled. He defended his decision to invade Iraq in the same way, saying Saddam was competing with Iran to get a nuclear weapon and making the region unstable. But when pressed by Pelley, Bush concedes that conditions in Iraq are much worse now.
Pelley: But wasn't it your administration that created the instability in Iraq? Bush: "Our administration took care of a source of instability in Iraq. Envision a world in which Saddam Hussein was rushing for a nuclear weapon to compete against Iran... He was a significant source of instability. Pelley: It's much more unstable now, Mr. President. Bush: Well, no question, decisions have made things unstable.
"I think history is going to look back and see a lot of ways we could have done things better. No question about it," says Bush.
Toppling Saddam was not a mistake, however. "My decision to remove Saddam Hussein was the correct decision in my judgment. We didn't find the weapons we thought we would find or the weapons everybody thought he had. But he was a significant source of instability," Bush tells Pelley. "We liberated that country from a tyrant. I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude and I believe most Iraqi's express that."
The execution of Saddam was mishandled, says the president, who saw only parts of it on the Internet because he didn't want to watch the dictator fall through the trap door. "I thought it was discouraging... It's important that that chapter of Iraqi history be closed. [But] They could have handled it a lot better."
I hate it (yet it's so predictable) when the F***ing media spins Bush's words to fit their agenda and then JUMP and JUMP on it ad nauseam...
Yes?
They kept yelling for him to "apologize," and now he's done so - but for mistakes, not for the whole idea. Mistakes were made. We weren't harsh enough, basically, and handled too many things (mosques, for example) with kid gloves. This encouraged the terrorists.
We also didn't realize how much we would be undermined domestically by the press and the Dems, who made us look weak rather than merciful and basically encouraged the terrorists by attacking Bush rather than the terrorists and their supporting countries.
But it's a long way from acknowledging mistakes and saying the whole thing was wrong. And obviously, now that he has said this, the Dems can't complain about his taking a totally different tack and launching the all-out fight as we should have done in the first place. (Which is what I HOPE he is going to do.)
|
No, I really don't think he has a thing to apologize for.
Deficit spending? Yeah that sucks. We're fighting 2 wars and just had the largest natural disaster ever hit America and the economy is humming along and the ratio of deficit to gdp is one of the smallest ever and income tax revenue is up significantly.
Well when we took out nazi germany & japan it caused instabliity. If we left those two countries (cut & run) to the Soviet Union it would been a diaster but we did not. So the world has been much better in the long run. I bet that it is the point he will make & if not I will.
Bush has been reading the New York Times too much. Want to stabalize the world and send a message that we ARE the world's superpower? Take the gloves off and give IRAN a pummeling that will take 30 years to rebuild, then we'll see how brave the rest of these terrorists and tin-horn dictators are.
One word out of Kim Jong-Il and Marines kidnap Areck Barrwin and don't release him until North Korea allows us to totally dismantle their nuclear technology.
If the state of the deficit is such that compared to the GDP, it's at nearly historic lows than why are the Wall Street analysts entirely concerned?
Unfortunately, before 9/11 (much like the rest of us), the Bush Administration didn't know much about Islam. I don't think they really had a plan about what to do (or estimated the difficulties they would encounter) once they took "control."
It takes time. Reality is not a 60 min tv show
The biggest cause of instability in Iraq has been the MEDIA.
They have lied and done everything possible to undermine the mission, and President Bush.
I can hardly believe this report.
I'm going to go to my grave not knowing the answer to this mystery.
Actually, I could make an argument for why the administration doesn't talk about the knowledge that WMD went to Syria.
But there's no argument that can be made for letting the left get away with saying AQ wasn't in Iraq before the war. It's a lie and a demonstrably provable lie, but the silence from the administration is deafening.
And that silence has emboldened the Democrats to tell ever-more outrageous lies which sadly the American public largely believes and thus support for the war has gone down substantially.
NEW TONE! COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATISM!
No, I do not.
Your ignorance is showing.
I sure hope the gloves are really off. We need to know who put them on in the first place.
I agree. For some reason, Drudge is reaching hard to find an attention-grabbing title.
Maybe to promote his Sunday night radio show?
Whatever. It's.... ham-handed and tacky.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.