"There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat."
Reportedly (meaning "I haven't read the book 'cause it's not on sale until next week, so this is all second-hand"), Tenet clarifies further, saying at no time "was there ever a significant discussion" about other means that might be used to contain Iraq other than going to war.
Think about that for a moment. Just ponder the implications.
In the run-up to the war, months before the start, the administration repeatedly told us it was exploring all options, that it wanted to avoid war if possible, etc. These claims were always viewed skeptically in some quarters, but now we have someone who actually participated in the pre-war discussions and decision-making affirming those claims were lies.
Also reportedly, Tenet asserts the following:
* The CIA and Tenet were convinced Saddam had WMDs (although he also says his infamous "slam dunk" comment made in a briefing was about the need to use their presumed existence for PR purposes, not about the actual existence of WMDs).
* The CIA was extremely skeptical about alleged Iraq - Al Qaeda links.
* The CIA repeatedly pointed out how difficult it would be to hold Iraq together post-Sadaam.
As history shows, the CIA was horribly wrong on the first point, and completely correct about the latter two -- which just serves to illustrate the "cherry-picking" approach the administration took in assessing intel for it's pre-determined war. Since the CIA supported the case for war on the WMD issue it was, of course, considered reliable on that matter.
However, the same CIA which was "reliable" on WMD intel was "unreliable" vis-a-vis Al Qaeda links or post-war matters. Other sources claiming we would be "greeted as liberators" were, of course, far more reliable than the CIA about such things. An intel source was "reliable" on a matter if it supported the administration's case for war, and if it didn't they'd find another, "more reliable" source that did.
All-in-all, it seems Tenet asserts the administration got it's mind set on war, and was going to have it's war come hell or high water.
In case anyone hasn't noticed, it got hell.
Update: Apparently everyone finished reading their preview copies at the same time. The NY Times has an article about it here.
2 comments:
Wow, Sirocco, this is almost spooky.
An excellent post, and I almost posted on the same subject, with eerily similar remarks, but held off.
I have nothing to add to your remarks, except that I had a little language about how the WMD issue could have been forwarded without any WTC event or Al Qaeda link.
I remain of the opinion that Bush was working on the invasion of Iraq using the WMD argument independent of any terrorist attack.
History will reveal much in time.
If you have not implemented statcounter yet, suggest you do. (It's free.) Your blog (like mine) is of the nature that gets few commments compared to visits.
Statcounter will let you know, whether anyone comments or not, that some folks are visiting.
Thanks for the mention of Statcounter, it's quite a neat little tool.
I suspect the lack of comments is more related to a lack of visits (as far as I know, you are the only site linking to this page), but c'est la vie. This site exists primarily as an opportunity to bleed my thoughts out onto a page somewhere.
Post a Comment