Start with bin Laden," Bush said, "which Americans expect. And then if we succeeed, we've struck a huge blow and can move forward." He called the threat "a cancer" and added, "We don't want to define [it] too broadly for the average man to understand."p. 43
As for Saddam Hussein, the president ended the debate. "I believe Iraq was involved, but I'm not going to strike them now. I don't have the evidence at this point."
Bush said he wanted them to keep working on plans for military action in Iraq but indicated there would be plenty of time to do that. Everything else, though, had to be done soon.
"Start now," the president said. "It's very important to move fast. This is the new way."
p. 99
Rumsfeld raised the possibility that weapons of mass destruction could be used against the United States. "It's an energizer for the American people," he said. "It's a completely different situation from anything we've ever faced before." Should the president address the issue in his speech?
"I left it out," Bush said flatly. "It could overwhelm the whole speech. At some point we have to brief the nation, absolutely. But I took it out. It's going to stay out. I thought long and hard about it."
Bush, clearly fearful of alarming people just nine days after the shocking attacks, said they would address it later, perhaps when they had better information.
"Do it in the context of an overall strategy," he said. "Need to be sure. Need to be honest," he added, "but I don't know about being brutally honest."
p. 106
"I'm worried about the BW threat, Cheney said, biological warfare.
Several of those present wondered if the vice president knew something, or if he had connected things they had missed. He was a thorough reader of intelligence reports and connector of dots. But there seemed to be nothing specific.
p. 166
"Many believe Saddam is involved," [Bush] said. "That's not an issue for now. If we catch him being involved, we'll act. He probably was behind this in the end."
p. 167
They turned to the hot topic of anthrax. The powder in the letter mailed to Senator Daschle's office had been found to be potent, prompting officials to suggest its source was likely an expert capable of producing the bacteria in large amounts. Tenet said, "I think it's AQ" -- meaning al Qaeda. "I think there's a state sponsor involved. It's too well thought out, the powder's too well refined. It might be Iraq, it might be Russia, it might be a renegade scientist," perhaps from Iraq or Russia.
Scooter Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, said he also thought the anthrax attacks were state sponsored. "We've got to be careful on what we say." It was important not to lay it on anyone now. "If we say it's al Qaeda, a state sponsor may feel safe and then hit us thinking they will have a bye because we'll blame it on al Qaeda."
"I'm not going to talk about a state sponsor," Tenet assured them.
"It's good that we don't," said Cheney, "because we're not ready to do anything about it."
p. 244
As we walked back, Bush again brought up Iraq. His blueprint or model for decision making in any war against Iraq, he told me, could be found in the story I was attempting to tell--the first months of the war in Afghanistan and the largely invisible CIA covert war against terrorism worldwide.
"You have the story," he said. Look hard at what you've got, he seemed to be saying. It was all there if it was pieced together--what he had learned, how he had settled into the presidency, his focus on larger goals, how he made decisions, why he provoked his war cabinet and pressured people for action.
I was straining to understand the meaning of this. At first his remark and what he had said before seemed to suggest he was leaning towards an attack on Iraq. Earlier in the interview, however, he had said, "I'm the kind of person that wants to make sure that all risk is assessed. But a president is constantly analyzing, making decisions based upon risk, particularly in war--risk taken relative to what can be achieved." What he wanted to achieve seemed clear. He wanted Saddam out.
Before he got back to his truck, Bush added another piece to the Iraqi puzzle. He had not yet seen a successful plan for Iraq, he said. He had to be careful and patient.
"A president, he added, "likes to have a military plan that will be successful."
p. 343
Cheney was beyond hell-bent for action against Saddam. It was as if nothing else existed.
p. 346
The proposals will form the framework of a long-awaited second resolution, which could be put before the Security Council by next weekend.
The deadline would be just long enough for Arab neighbours to make a last effort to persuade Saddam to leave the country, according to US officials, or for a coup to take place. The shortest timeframe to emerge from private diplomatic discussions has been two days.
The phrasing of the new, deliberately concise UN resolution would deny Saddam a fresh chance to say that he will comply with Security Council demands. Britain will put forward the resolution because Washington "does not want to be seen to need it", according to a senior Security Council diplomat.
Foreign Office officials confirmed that Saudi Arabia has offered to take Saddam if he goes into exile. Last month Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, said he would be "delighted" if Saddam fled Iraq.
"To avoid a war, I would personally recommend that some provision be made so that the senior leadership and their families could be provided haven in some other country," he said.
To be passed, the new resolution would require the support of nine of the 15 Security Council members, assuming there was no veto from France, China or Russia. British and American officials last night made clear that they do not expect a unanimous vote in its favour but are confident that a veto can be avoided.
"The resolution being discussed would declare that Saddam is in material breach of UN resolutions, which authorises the use of all necessary means to disarm him," one senior Security Council diplomat said."
Wake up and smell the coffee, GS. The only way that we do not actually invade is if Saddam steps down. And not some phoney "have his son take over" scenario.