Replies

"having said that, i'm not sure that this wasn't a pretty big screw up, objectively, by the admin."

I understand that feeling, but I keep coming back to the fact that the Brits insist that the Africa intel was only one part of the overall comfirming info, and that they still stand by the original premis.

"Africa intel was only one part of the overall comfirming info, and that they still stand by the original premis. "

I totally concur with that...however, I would say that the inescapable tone of the coverage was that we could find what Hans Idiot and his team of ding dongs could not find, duped as they were by the Iraqis (I still believe that characerization is self-evident, incidentally).

Perhaps that was not a realistic expectation...which is fair enough. However, I don't think enough effort was made before hand to squash expectations. I think that was b/c the admin believed that they would turn up more concrete things than have appeared. I believe the admin is a bit nervous.

I think attacking Iraq was a darn good thing.

However, I think the "we'll find WMD" justification which played at least some of the role in the justification in the mind of the public was overstated and underdelivered.

I think that creates a legitimacy problem for any government.

I could be totally wrong, however.