Posted on 07/14/2003 8:59:22 PM PDT by Utah Girl
On the ground floor of the White House is the Map Room, so-called because it was here that Franklin Roosevelt used to get his briefings on the progress of World War II. Over the mantel is the last map FDR saw before his death. It shows American, British, and Soviet troops racing toward Berlin. It also shows a frightening concentration of German forces in the Nazis’ last redoubt, the mountains of Bavaria.
We now know of course that this last redoubt did not exist. American intelligence had been deceived. And it’s possible that policymakers also deceived themselves. Roosevelt, for reasons of his own, wanted to let the Russians have the honor – and suffer the losses – of an assault on Berlin. The belief in the last redoubt was a very useful belief: It justified FDR’s wish to avoid joining the battle for Berlin.
Intelligence is a very uncertain business. And there’s no doubt that consumers of intelligence tend to be quicker to accept uncertain information that confirms their prejudices than uncertain information that calls those prejudices into question. Since consumers of intelligence are usually prejudiced in favor of doing little, most of the time they prefer intelligence that errs on the side of minimizing dangers.
9/11 changed the way American officials looked at the world. So when they got reports that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium in Niger, you can understand why they took the information seriously. That information has since turned out to be false – and its falsity has generated a major political controversy, as bitter-end opponents of this president and the war on terror try to exploit the administration’s error.
The controversy turns on the fact that some in the CIA doubted the story from the start. Their warnings were apparently disregarded, that is assuming that they were adequately communicated in the first place. Why? One reason may be that the CIA’s warnings on Iraq matters had lost some of their credibility in the 1990s. The agency was regarded by many in the Bush administration as reflexively and implacably hostile to any activist policy in Iraq. Those skeptics had come to believe that the agency was slanting its information on Iraq in order to maneuver the administration into supporting the agency’s own soft-line policies.
So when the Bush administration got skeptical news on the Niger uranium matter, it would not be surprising if mid-level policymakers mentally filed it under the heading “more of the same from the CIA,” filed it, and discounted it. The tendency was redoubled by the origin of the Niger-debunking report: Joseph C. Wilson. For more about him, see Clifford May's important post in last week's NRO. The result was the strange formulation in the State of the Union speech, in which the Niger story was cited – but attributed to British intelligence.
The story is an embarrassment for all concerned. But it no more undercuts the case for the Iraq war than FDR’s mistake in 1945 retroactively discredited the case for World War II. The United States did not overthrow Saddam Hussein because he was buying uranium in Niger. It overthrow him because he was a threat to the United States, to his neighbors, to his own people, and to the peace of a crucial region of the globe. All of that is just as true as it was on the day the President delivered his speech containing the errant 16 words – and the war is just as right and justified today as it was then.
Not without people who didn't pay taxes, getting a cut of your cut.
Huh, it seems that you are the one who wants to use the hyperbole and whining.
Gotta show that somehow Bush directing his way through the minefield called American politics is on par with Clinton raping Juanita Brodderick.
Shameless, IMO.
So did I. But please explain to me how someone getting a tax credit when they didn't pay taxes is something other than welfare. And while you're at it, please explain how increasing spending while cutting taxes shrinks the size of government.
Either this is an old story, or the writer of this article is not keeping up with the news going on around him.
Britain stands behind the claim that Iraq attempted to purchase 'yellowcake' from Africa. Although a few documents are now thought to have been forged, there was other intelligence that supported this bit of information.
Although this article tries to give Bush the benefit of the doubt, it continues to promote a liberal lie.
Dane, having read your posts here at FR for several years, I can safely say that you wouldn't know shame if it bit you squarely in the ass. So don't insult my intelligence by pretending otherwise. Face it, you're defending the indefensible, so I do understand that it severely limits the rhetorical approaches you can take. But you can do better than acting completely out of character.
Why do you think that raising your voice in oppostion to democrat-like republican actions, is equivalent to "cutting off your nose, or voting for a democrat"?
It isn't.
In fact, I'd submit that your silence gives more aid and comfort to the enemy, than your honest objection ever would.
Quit making excuses, and stand for something.
He's the only one it takes to veto socialist legislation.
But alas.
There are some old line Republican conservatives that do NOT think that the US should be the policeman for the world. I happen to be one of these that feel that the opinion of Washington in his farewell address to beware of foreign entanglements is a pretty good guide to go by.
In regard to the Democrat talking points, a goodly amount of lies are spread in their arguments. Does this justify retaliation in kind? We have some rather serious lapses between truth and fiction in some of our Republican talking points.
The party line does not cancel out my given right to use my head and make the comments that I wish to make in justification of my views. When we start practicing speech censorship on Free Republic, that is when Free Republic ceases to be a viable form of expresssion. You make the call, I'll be long gone if that is your wish.
And for all the talk about how the Dems can block judges with 41 votes in the Senate, it never occurred to the GOP to use the same tactic to block these spending increases. Go figure.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That's it. I'm done. When OWK tells me to do something, I'm done on a thread.
Been fun guys, later.
One of which was for people who don't pay taxes.
Yes, Bush did sign spending increases for homeland security, et al. In light of the continuing threat of terrorism, I'd say it was a wise move. Now, whether that money is actually being spent wisely is another story.
I never call for banning. The most I request is that an offending post be removed.
Now, if you want to talk about disassociating oneself from bad companions, you might take a second look at some of the people who are in your company.
And if you don't pay any attention to who is calling for banning and who is not, how do you feel qualified to attack me on this issue?
But where does the insanity lie?
My Senator, Voinovich, voted for the reduced tax cuts... No amount of phone calls, letters, faxes, or emails could change his mind.
So, in the next Senate race my choices are Voinovich or Jerry Springer! Jerry Springer!
In my opinion, here's the root of the problem. RINO's or gutless Republicans in Washington are just the fruit of the problem.
Unless the Ohio Republican party gives me an alternative to Voinovich, I will have to vote for him because I'm not voting for Jerry. (I know that Jerry has only filed papers and is still deciding whether he will run or not)
But if the root problem is going to be fixed... it has to be fixed in the states... Where are the new candidates? The true conservatives? Who are looking out for the country and not their political careers?
Maybe the more pertinent question is "does that type of politician really exist?"
Until those candidates step up to the plate and run, I'm going to stick with the Republicans I got because of the war on terror and the judiciary nominations... And because of the war on terror, I'm behind this President.
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.