Senate Intelligence Committee Unveils Final Phase II Reports On Prewar Iraq Intelligence

I heard this covered momentarily on the radio and saw nothing about it on the TV which I find very odd. I’d figure the left would eat this up 24/7. But I suppose Obama (the savior) is MORE important than what this committee concluded. ? .

I haven’t quite made up my mind about this report, although I can’t argue with the report’s claim that Bush and Cheney’s statements didn’t match the intelligence data. The question I ask and most people should ask is, “Did Bush/Cheney lie? Were they just tools? What was the intent?” I’m not so quick to make such judgments. I realize just about everyone leading up to the war believed Saddam to be a threat. However, once we found out what a little threat he really was, Bush still continued the same ol’ lines. At least he could balance the situation and say his side of the story.

On page 100 the minority vice chairman Bond along with other senators respond to the report with some good points to balance the report out. He quotes many senators and even Rockefeller (the chairman of the committee) who believed Saddam was moving forward with nuclear weapons. The question I have is what the Dems were going to get out of using this information. It could be argued that the Reps were trying to get us to go to war in Iraq but what were Dems trying to do; because they were going right along with it.

Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the war in Iraq (I certaintly have my issues and think we should not have done it in the first place) we are there and must ensure stability and finish what we started; we can’t do the Obama get up and run policy. The last thing needed in Iraq is less military because the troop surge did work (DUH!).

So check out the report, I thinks its worth a read.

Overview LINK
PDF Transcript LINK

2 thoughts on “Senate Intelligence Committee Unveils Final Phase II Reports On Prewar Iraq Intelligence”

  1. Hey Matt,
    Clearly, the Dems can’t use it which is probably why it didn’t get media attention. I suppose the bottom line is that at the time, the conventional wisdom was that Saddam was a threat. Although, I have no regrets considering that the man at best was a tyranical nightmare and likely hundreds of thousands of iraqis are alive today because our troops are there. Also, there is the school of thought that putting any head on a pike makes your enemies t hink twice and I do believe that Iraq has been effective in that way. The bottom line seems to be that no matter how much we try or would like it to be so, we cannot second guess our actions after they have been implemented, we have no time tunnel to jump into and change t hings and we have no way of knowing how many more attacks were prevented by doing what we did.
    Annie

  2. You’re very right about that. There is merit in discussing the morality of any given action for the purpose of determining the better course for future action, but not for the purpose of judging the past. The past is the past, and it must be let to lie.

    BTW, this was JPennStar’s article, but thank you for your comments.

Leave a Reply