THAT URANIUM STORY

NRO ^ | 7/14/2003 | David Frum

[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.

[OWK]

I wish he wasn't doing all these things, but he doesn't take my calls.

A minute ago you said it was a price you'd happily pay.

Now you say you wish he wasn't doing it.

Which is it?

And if you wish he wasn't doing it, then why not speak out about it, instead of ridiculing those who do?

[OWK]

Yes lets get more do absolute stupid, do nothing Dems like Hillary in there to rob you blind. At least the Republicans don't steal as much.

Why do they steal at all?

And why do you wring your hands and excuse it?

"Not quite as bad as the socialist democrats" is not a rallying cry for me.

Maybe it works for you.. I don't know.

[Jim Robinson]

You don't get it because you hate the Republicans so much you're simply assuming they're as bad as the Democrats. They're not. If they were, we'd already have universal healthcare paid by the government for all. We'd already have totally government funded campaigns. The Electoral college would already be gone. We'd already have a repeal of the second amendment. We'd already be subserviant to a world court, a world army and a world tax. The UN would be much further entrenched than it already is. We'd already have signed on to the Kyoto treaty. You hate the Republicans so much that you fail to realize that they are the only thing standing between you and a complete Democrat liberal socialist utopia.

[Jim Robinson]

It's a price I'll happily pay if it's the only way I can get it. Obviously, I wish, hope and pray that the price could be less expensive. And maybe it will.

[OWK]

I don't "hate" republicans. I'd love nothing more than to have a GOP that actually stood for something.

I thought at one time that might actually be possible.

But people like you with your "I'll pay any price for control" mentality, make it increasingly difficult to believe that the GOP will ever be anything more than a slightly-less-socialist alternative to the democrats.

By excusing every failing, and telling them over and over and over that anything they do is OK provided it helps them stay in power, principle is lost to pragmatism.

And even that could be lived with if the pragamatic goals were liberty and rights.

But by your own admission, they aren't.

The goal is power. What's to be done with that power is of minimal concern by your own admission.

Read your own words on this thread.

They're an eye-opener.

[OWK]

Obviously, I wish, hope and pray that the price could be less expensive. And maybe it will.

I guess my point Jim, is that the price will never be different, unless you make it different.

Wishing and hoping isn't going to change things.

You have the Whitehouse, and both houses of congress.

Do something with it.

Use your website to do something with it.

[Captain Kirk]

Nobody in the Bush administration acknowledged that we would be caught in the middle of a slow bleed guerrilla war. Their views on the "liberating Iraq" and the aftermatah were far more Pollyannish than you indicate.

[Jim Robinson]

B/S.

[bmwcyle]

So we elect a Libertarian with the same problem, a sinful falled human. Libertarians will have that human ego just like the two parties in power. You will never see the reality of the nature of man until you look through the eyes of Christ but I don't think you will ever get it.

[Miss Marple]

Why are all these people suddenly appearing? It is very difficult to get through threads lately with all of the attacks from the left and the anti-Bush conservatives.

[The Red Zone]

Is this your opus?

[ovrtaxt]

The problem here with many of us who struggle with the way the Republican party is going is their lack of follow through. examples:

1. The war on terror is going nicely, but Saudi Arabia is off limits. Sad, since they are the puppet master behind all this, the original source of Wahabbism.

2. Economically, we get a pittance of a tax cut. Yay. Then, we pass spending bills like mad on socialist utopia crap. The war is costly, but that's fine. Drugs for seniors, Kennedy's education bill et al. isn't.

Socially, a Christian holds the presidency. The inauguration made countless praying Americans cry because of the depth of sincerity and honor of GWB. How thankful we were. Now we are staring gay marriage in the face. If we are cynical about the future of the judiciary, can we be blamed? Look at the track record. Does Bush have 8 Clarence Thomases waiting in line?

We don't hate the Republicans, Jim. We are a little gun shy though. We are on the same team, but I won't hasitate to criticise failure for the good of America over the party. They are simply not representing limited government anymore. It bothers many of us.

[The Red Zone]

wish he wasn't doing all these things, but he doesn't take my calls.

You haven't used the right number. It's 1-888-BUSH-BOT

just kidding! don't ban me!

[Jim Robinson]

Yes, I'm willing to pay whatever short-term price we have to pay to keep the Democrats out of power for another four and hopefully eight or tweleve years. As I've stated a thousand times it's the only way we can turnover the judiciary. If you let the Democrats have it back, we'll simply be adding more liberal activists to the bench and continue setting ourselves back decades at a time. The cycle has to be broken sooner or later. Might as well do it now while we have a popular Republican president and a majority in the Congress. We need to hang on to the presidency and continue building on the majority and continue replacing liberal judges with conservatives as the old libs retire or die off. We must also work to replace the Rinos with conservatives as we can (without losing the majority). We must also work in our local districts to move new conservative blood up the ladder. It can be done. Takes time, dedication and hard work. How else would you propose doing it?

[The Red Zone]

How else would you propose doing it?

lemme guess what he sez: darwin rules?

[Jim Robinson]

Now how in the world are they going to elect a libertarian? Are they claiming they can elect a libertarian president in '04?

[Prodigal Son]

bump for interesting discussion

[The Red Zone]

Does Bush have 8 Clarence Thomases waiting in line?

Actually I wouldn't be too surprised. He has already offended the [dickens] out of the Senate to the point of filibuster, that has to count for something. It's not the Bush judicial picks, it's the marshmallowy GOP presence in the Senate.

[Neets]

I guess my point Jim, is that the price will never be different, unless you make it different.

You have the Whitehouse, and both houses of congress.

Do something with it.

Use your website to do something with it.

OWK, Your use of the word that I bolded speaks volumes about your leanings and your agenda.

You , Miss Marple, are absolutely correct about this comment, "It is very difficult to get through threads lately with all of the attacks from the left and the anti-Bush conservatives."

[Jim Robinson]

How many Clarence Thomases do the Democrats have lined up? Hell, how many conservatives of any stripe do the Democrats have lined up?

If the Democrats had their way, the top tax rates would probably be north of seventy percent. Most of us would be paying probably double what we're paying now. And the minimun wage would probably be approaching $25 per hour.