Starting to admit that we were wrong

[SonomaCat]

Well, the administration isn't going so far as to admit that they were wrong or in any way responsible, but at least we are now publicly acknowledging that the assertions we used to invade Iraq were wrong.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f ... 428S00.DTL

Here's my "glass is half full" outlook. If the U.S. can give the appearance that we are coming clean in admitting that we messed up in invading Iraq (while still letting Bush save face by not admitting that he and advisors screwed up by choosing to believe only the intel that reinforced what they wanted to hear), we can perhaps begin to earn back some legitimacy on the international level. People like to see a superpower humbled, and saying "We were wrong" is something that many cynics don't think our adminstration is capable of doing.

So we let ourselves look a bit foolish and perhaps win back some support from our allies. We aren't going to accomplish jack without them and all other countries. It appears that Bush's trip to Europe, along with the work of Condi Rice, has actually been impressing the Europeans to some extent, which is a marked change in tone from the last couple years. Perhaps this term, the administration is finally beginning to understand and appreciate diplomacy and that we are a part of the world, not the bosses of the world.

At the same time, we continue to bring Iraq around and, with a lot of luck, create a feasible democracy in the region. This very well could (and perhaps already has) shaken up the status quo in the region enough to stir democractic rumblings in other Middle Eastern countries. Perhaps, in time, this could lead to more democracy in that region and the fall of the theocratic dictatorships that plague the region.

This could be a bit of "be careful what you wish for" as well. Many of these dictatorships are friendly towards us now, and that wouldn't be a certainty if the will of the people was heeded. In either case, let's start weening ourselves from oil! More research into alternatives (how about more federal grants to MSU -- I'm sure we can come up with something spectacular)!

In any case, I am finding reasons to be cautiously optimistic. I hope we can look back in ten years and say that the Bush administration was incompetently brilliant, or successful despite themselves, or stupid like a fox. Whatever catch-phrase, I hope it all works out well regardless of the missteps that have occurred along the way.

[Cat Grad]

I have many reservations when it comes time to critic our intelligence communities. Exactly where would we draw the line in order to also preserve fundamental constitutional rights and still protect a rather blissful populace? How far do we invade everyone's privacy? What percent of all phone calls in the U.S. are monitored and recorded? We know for a fact that in order to protect our citizens we have to be beyond any and all reproach and I assure you we have many allies in the international community thanking us for the lead we have taken, as hard as it's been.

What about Iran or Syria? I will go to the grave knowing in my mind and heart we would never have had this disastrous decade had the Carter administration never left Georgia. Living in a world of fear is not anyplace I ever want my children to see. We're all taught as young Second Lieutenants to do something whether it's right or wrong, but damn it do something! If it's the wrong choice, fix it! Should we have simply put our heads in the sand and hoped and prayed the Muslims wouldn't do it again? I think even Osama now understands the sleeping giant can inflict real damage if we get pissed off and I dare anyone to challenge the fact that the world is not better off with Sadaam incarcerated.

Last bit that I'd like BAC to understand is that we have a very real obligation to use up the rest of the world's fossil fuels before we ever tap our Strategic Oil Reserves again. What about all the dams? Will we pacify all the environmentalists and begin breaching our hydropower plants? I for one don't want to see all my barley going into the production of ethanol; what would that do to the price of beer Perhaps grapes...

[Bleedinbluengold]

Maybe an apology much like Belushi did toward Stephen Bishop in Animal House is in order.

[Hell's Bells]

Maybe an apology much like Belushi did toward Stephen Bishop in Animal House is in order.

hey ill aplolgise...im sorry that i voted for bill clinton....wow now that feels better! judging from some of the posters on this websight i feel like i just came out of the closit....i am a concervative posting on bobcatnation about to defend the president...dont get mad at humble 'ol me, im just the messenger.

for starters who really liked hussein? Sadam Hussein fed his people into wood chippers, if you were one of the luckey ones you were fed in head first so there would be no pain. Speaking of torture the iraqui athletic teams were tortured if they did not win any of their games/events by sadams son udey. Did i not mention the fact that he gassed HIS OWN PEOPLE!

Wepons of mass destruction were one of the many reasons why president bush invaded iraq...and id hate to burst anyone's bubble but a mobile chem lab was found in iraq as well as other assorted items to spread/make wmd's, for example there was a drone plane that was converted to spray some sorta toxin on our troops/the native kurdish population/some poor unsuspecting iranian....speaking of which anyone search syria? and what about all the leaders of our sopposive allies that were bribed into being against the war?

finally, BAC admit it...your glad hussein is gone, and will be very happy when he is execuited.....just like i am....one worldwide thug down according to bush 2 to go...or one...i am entertained by leader of N. Korea but he is kinda dangerous

[SonomaCat]

Maybe an apology much like Belushi did toward Stephen Bishop in Animal House is in order.

hey ill aplolgise...im sorry that i voted for bill clinton....wow now that feels better! judging from some of the posters on this websight i feel like i just came out of the closit....i am a concervative posting on bobcatnation about to defend the president...dont get mad at humble 'ol me, im just the messenger.

for starters who really liked hussein? Sadam Hussein fed his people into wood chippers, if you were one of the luckey ones you were fed in head first so there would be no pain. Speaking of torture the iraqui athletic teams were tortured if they did not win any of their games/events by sadams son udey. Did i not mention the fact that he gassed HIS OWN PEOPLE!

Wepons of mass destruction were one of the many reasons why president bush invaded iraq...and id hate to burst anyone's bubble but a mobile chem lab was found in iraq as well as other assorted items to spread/make wmd's, for example there was a drone plane that was converted to spray some sorta toxin on our troops/the native kurdish population/some poor unsuspecting iranian....speaking of which anyone search syria? and what about all the leaders of our sopposive allies that were bribed into being against the war?

finally, BAC admit it...your glad hussein is gone, and will be very happy when he is execuited.....just like i am....one worldwide thug down according to bush 2 to go...or one...i am entertained by leader of N. Korea but he is kinda dangerous

WMD -- read the article. There were none. Let's be honest about that part. This is from the mouth of the administration itself. No more relying on the Drudge Report, okay?

And when we first attacked, WMD were THE reason we did it. The other reasons were only manufactured after the WMD thing turned out false.

I am glad that Saddam is out of power, of course (happy when he is executed? What friggin' century are you living in?). There are a lot of world leaders that I don't admire in the least. However, we as a country still must be truthful and even right in our reasons for attacking another country. Simply finding a bad leader and then blowing up his country isn't enough. We at least need to be able to say that we are going after him for being a dick instead of claiming that we must attack because he has WMD. Instead, we just get pissed off at France when it turns out that France was right and we were wrong.

I know, I'm beating my head against a wall. For some people who support the President (and look at everything as an all or nothing game of talk radio party politics) or who are blinded by patriotism, we as a country are incapable of making a mistake, and the rest of the world must simply get used to the fact that we are going to do whatever we want whenever we want. Looking at things from a different perspective is impossible.

All that being said, I think that anybody who can't admit that we made mistakes in our execution of this war is either in denial or is blinded by their politics, which is not a good place to be. We must be honest with ourselves about what has happened and the negative impact it has had on our ability to influence world opinion (which we need for future diplomatic projects). But at the same time, like I stressed, I am still hopeful that it will all work out well. I am also hopeful that the administration is learning from the mistakes of the recent past, even if many of the American people never will.

BTW, excellent use of the "we victimized conservatives" mantra. You have been taking notes from the talking heads. It's beautiful when the majority can whine about being oppressed.

[Cat Grad]

Strictly from a military viewpoint. Once upon a time many years ago while I was serving we prepared our soldiers and those in the G-5 sector for NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical) attacks. Although we found many projectiles filled with chemical agents, they were not next to those launchers capable of delivering them to the friendlies Therefore, there were no weapons of mass destruction left in Iraq (and I sure as hell wouldn't tell anybody what was found as we have enough of a problem handling all of our hysteria everytime a new improved strain of flu is discovered) But then again, I'm always amused when I recall how surprised our "media" was while watching how our soldiers communicated on the battlefield What you don't know won't scare you or make you jealous or...

[Cat Pride]

BAC - the entire world thought there was WMD in Iraq, not just the Bush Administration. Something tells me that the entire world didnt simply guess wrong on this. Even France and Germany thought WMD existed in Iraq. Ever think that maybe, just maybe, Sadam smuggled his weapons out to Syria, Saudi, etc while the UN was giving him spineless ultimatum after spilneless ultimatum?

The world is a better place for what our President had the balls to do in Iraq - and that is not simply bomb Bahgdad, but to actually stand up to Sadam try and change the way of life over there, set an entire county free from oppression and poverty. Go over there and ask any Iraqi or anyone in the middle east if they'd rather have Sadam back in power.

Women are voting in Afganistan and Iraq, there are no more rape and tourture rooms, kids are no longer being stolen from their parents because of differing opinions....in the two short years it has taken to get this far....that is an amazing fast track accomplishment! It took longer to rebuild Europe after World War II than it has taken to get free elections in 2 middle east countries!

As Lee Greenwood said..."I'm proud to be an America..."

[Hell's Bells]

Maybe an apology much like Belushi did toward Stephen Bishop in Animal House is in order.

hey ill aplolgise...im sorry that i voted for bill clinton....wow now that feels better! judging from some of the posters on this websight i feel like i just came out of the closit....i am a concervative posting on bobcatnation about to defend the president...dont get mad at humble 'ol me, im just the messenger.

for starters who really liked hussein? Sadam Hussein fed his people into wood chippers, if you were one of the luckey ones you were fed in head first so there would be no pain. Speaking of torture the iraqui athletic teams were tortured if they did not win any of their games/events by sadams son udey. Did i not mention the fact that he gassed HIS OWN PEOPLE!

Wepons of mass destruction were one of the many reasons why president bush invaded iraq...and id hate to burst anyone's bubble but a mobile chem lab was found in iraq as well as other assorted items to spread/make wmd's, for example there was a drone plane that was converted to spray some sorta toxin on our troops/the native kurdish population/some poor unsuspecting iranian....speaking of which anyone search syria? and what about all the leaders of our sopposive allies that were bribed into being against the war?

finally, BAC admit it...your glad hussein is gone, and will be very happy when he is execuited.....just like i am....one worldwide thug down according to bush 2 to go...or one...i am entertained by leader of N. Korea but he is kinda dangerous

WMD -- read the article. There were none. Let's be honest about that part. This is from the mouth of the administration itself. No more relying on the Drudge Report, okay?

And when we first attacked, WMD were THE reason we did it. The other reasons were only manufactured after the WMD thing turned out false.

I am glad that Saddam is out of power, of course (happy when he is executed? What friggin' century are you living in?). There are a lot of world leaders that I don't admire in the least. However, we as a country still must be truthful and even right in our reasons for attacking another country. Simply finding a bad leader and then blowing up his country isn't enough. We at least need to be able to say that we are going after him for being a dick instead of claiming that we must attack because he has WMD. Instead, we just get pissed off at France when it turns out that France was right and we were wrong.

I know, I'm beating my head against a wall. For some people who support the President (and look at everything as an all or nothing game of talk radio party politics) or who are blinded by patriotism, we as a country are incapable of making a mistake, and the rest of the world must simply get used to the fact that we are going to do whatever we want whenever we want. Looking at things from a different perspective is impossible.

All that being said, I think that anybody who can't admit that we made mistakes in our execution of this war is either in denial or is blinded by their politics, which is not a good place to be. We must be honest with ourselves about what has happened and the negative impact it has had on our ability to influence world opinion (which we need for future diplomatic projects). But at the same time, like I stressed, I am still hopeful that it will all work out well. I am also hopeful that the administration is learning from the mistakes of the recent past, even if many of the American people never will.

BTW, excellent use of the "we victimized conservatives" mantra. You have been taking notes from the talking heads. It's beautiful when the majority can whine about being oppressed.

we conservatives are victimized....by a congress/house with no spine but id hate to get off on another tangent

now to my point...president bush did list wmd's as ONE OF the reasons why we went into iraq. also Hussein is responsible for mass graves, torture...ect. i am not wanting him execuited because i am "blinded by my patritoism", it is because of those mass graves. He is now amongst a select few world leaders, hitler, stalin, mao, pol-pot, Milosevic, who are personally responsible for the mass execution of innocents. sorry BAC but some people are just two dangerous to let live in a normal civilized society. I am a very forgiving person.

what's wrong with patrtitiosm? hey man i love my country, and to be honest with you i see nothing wrong with it, meaning love of thy country. I appricate what my forefathers have done in the past, and the sacrifices they did to get to where we are

[bronco]

Saddam was a weapon of mass destruction....just have to look at the mass graves.

[Hell's Bells]

Saddam was a weapon of mass destruction....just have to look at the mass graves.

I agree with you...sadam was a wepon of mass destruction. To be mentioned along with the names of hitler, stalin, pol-pot, mao, and whats his face over in serbia must take tallent. Somebody should start a thread...proper punishment for hussein....his ilk should never get to power again.

buy the way he was a iraqui socialist/lennonist/maoist of the arab type...his party, the bathist party wanted to unite all arabs in the mid-east during the 60's, it did not get far. for anyone who complains that we equiped him i will mention that he got most of his wepons from russia during the cold war, and after from france and germany.

[Hell's Bells]

http://www.ceip.org/files/pdf/Iraq3Appendices.pdf
Unclassified NIE report
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd ... html#sect0
Dulfer report

read and judge for yourself

[Cat Grad]

Aren't you glad we live here? If you'd posted this under Sadaam or the late Uday, well....I don't really need to say what would have happened, do I God, I love freedom!

[SonomaCat]

now to my point...president bush did list wmd's as ONE OF the reasons why we went into iraq. also Hussein is responsible for mass graves, torture...ect. i am not wanting him execuited because i am "blinded by my patritoism", it is because of those mass graves. He is now amongst a select few world leaders, hitler, stalin, mao, pol-pot, Milosevic, who are personally responsible for the mass execution of innocents. sorry BAC but some people are just two dangerous to let live in a normal civilized society. I am a very forgiving person.

what's wrong with patrtitiosm? hey man i love my country, and to be honest with you i see nothing wrong with it, meaning love of thy country. I appricate what my forefathers have done in the past, and the sacrifices they did to get to where we are

We would not have gone to war without a WMD argument. Everything else was merely a footnote to the WMD argument. If we can't come to grips with that undeniable fact, then we can't even begin to have a intellectually honest conversation on the topic. I am taking the position that perhaps that the ends are justifying the means, with strong reservations about how we got to the ends.

However, to not be able to admit that we went to war over a point that turned out to not be true (WMD) is burying one's head in the sand, and a sympton of exactly why we are struggling to retain the respect of the rest of the world. And yes, we do need to respect of the rest of the world. You can't lead without it, and I'm really not in the mood to let our country become the next USSR figure in the world.

I can respect the idea, if you truly believe it, that we went to war for purely humanitarian reasons and to eliminate a leader that was killing his own people. That's very liberal and enlightened of you. However, you must realize that if that is the threshold for invading a country that we have a lot of work left to do. So, in your opinion, should we have also exceeded the U.N.'s force and invaded Somolia and Rwanda, as well as the many other countries in the world with brutal murderous leaders? To have an effective foreign policy, we have to at least be somewhat consistent in our actions. If you agree that we should have commited a full invasion of both of those countries, then I will accept you Iraq invasion justification.

My own theory is that we really botched the justification for invading Iraq, and we look really foolish for it (and we are now trying to mend the fences, which is a very good thing). However, if we can make Iraq work as a functioning democracy, then perhaps a net positive will result with time, and we will look good in the eyes of the world despite the errors on the front end. That is my sincere hope.

Nothing is wrong with patriotism -- I am very patriotic myself. We just can't let patriotism morph into narcissism on a national level. That's dangerous.

[SonomaCat]

BAC - the entire world thought there was WMD in Iraq, not just the Bush Administration. Something tells me that the entire world didnt simply guess wrong on this. Even France and Germany thought WMD existed in Iraq. Ever think that maybe, just maybe, Sadam smuggled his weapons out to Syria, Saudi, etc while the UN was giving him spineless ultimatum after spilneless ultimatum?

Yes, everybody had faulty intel that suggested that there may be WMD. We were simply the only country with the vision to collect all of this weak intel, cull out the contradictory intel that contained the truth, and then initiated an invasion of a country on the back of the assertion of the existence of WMD. We did this while the rest of the world said that we shouldn't do it.

No matter how we try to dance around it, the truth remains the same. WE WERE WRONG! WE INVADED A COUNTRY BASED ON A FALSE PREMISE!

I think our entire country's mindset would be much healthier once we accept those facts. We can then honestly answer the question that important now -- what do we do from here? Despite the fact that we were wrong in our initial assertion, I have hope that this will all work out well in the end, and that the fact that we were wrong on the front will be overshadowed by the positive results that we eventually see on the back-end. There's a lot less shame in being wrong when we can admit that we were wrong and make our decisions going forward with that understanding and acceptance. A little humility as a nation is not a bad thing at all, especially if the ultimate result of the mission is the spread of democracy through the Middle East.

[Hell's Bells]

now to my point...president bush did list wmd's as ONE OF the reasons why we went into iraq. also Hussein is responsible for mass graves, torture...ect. i am not wanting him execuited because i am "blinded by my patritoism", it is because of those mass graves. He is now amongst a select few world leaders, hitler, stalin, mao, pol-pot, Milosevic, who are personally responsible for the mass execution of innocents. sorry BAC but some people are just two dangerous to let live in a normal civilized society. I am a very forgiving person.

what's wrong with patrtitiosm? hey man i love my country, and to be honest with you i see nothing wrong with it, meaning love of thy country. I appricate what my forefathers have done in the past, and the sacrifices they did to get to where we are

We would not have gone to war without a WMD argument. Everything else was merely a footnote to the WMD argument. If we can't come to grips with that undeniable fact, then we can't even begin to have a intellectually honest conversation on the topic. I am taking the position that perhaps that the ends are justifying the means, with strong reservations about how we got to the ends.

However, to not be able to admit that we went to war over a point that turned out to not be true (WMD) is burying one's head in the sand, and a sympton of exactly why we are struggling to retain the respect of the rest of the world. And yes, we do need to respect of the rest of the world. You can't lead without it, and I'm really not in the mood to let our country become the next USSR figure in the world.

I can respect the idea, if you truly believe it, that we went to war for purely humanitarian reasons and to eliminate a leader that was killing his own people. That's very liberal and enlightened of you. However, you must realize that if that is the threshold for invading a country that we have a lot of work left to do. So, in your opinion, should we have also exceeded the U.N.'s force and invaded Somolia and Rwanda, as well as the many other countries in the world with brutal murderous leaders? To have an effective foreign policy, we have to at least be somewhat consistent in our actions. If you agree that we should have commited a full invasion of both of those countries, then I will accept you Iraq invasion justification.

My own theory is that we really botched the justification for invading Iraq, and we look really foolish for it (and we are now trying to mend the fences, which is a very good thing). However, if we can make Iraq work as a functioning democracy, then perhaps a net positive will result with time, and we will look good in the eyes of the world despite the errors on the front end. That is my sincere hope.

Nothing is wrong with patriotism -- I am very patriotic myself. We just can't let patriotism morph into narcissism on a national level. That's dangerous.

I respect the fact - as a fiscal concervative - that you wonder how and why we came up with the wmd argument. I am rather courious as to why we did not find the actual wepons, but what we did find is the capability to make those wepons again.

I also heard recently that our wmd reports were part of a massive disinformation campaign aimed at scaring us out of invading iraq...if so sure did work.

How can you say that the wmd's were the main reason why we went to war in iraq? I remember the pres listing several reasons why we are going into iraq, WMD's were, indeed a big reason but the rest of the list was not just footnotes.

BAC i love chatting with you about this...you are a very enlightened person, i belive our nation thrives on this type of talk.

[bronco]

HILLARY ON IRAQ AND TERRORISM

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.
Source: transcript of Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, October 10, 2002
_________________

I especially like this one...

"My husband may have his faults, but he has never lied to me."
Living History, Hillary Clinton, page 465

_________________________________________

Would any sane person believe that he really didn’t have WMD in 2003? If you don’t know any sane people, try out some of these:

• “And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.” President Clinton, December 16, 1998

• “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” Al Gore, September 23, 2002

• “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

• “I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country.” Senator John Edwards, February 24, 2002

This was not a coin flip. The consequence of trusting Saddam would have been WMD in the hands of anti-American terrorists. Had President Bush simply trusted Saddam Hussein he would have violated his oath to defend his country.

On March 22, 2003, or three days into Operation Iraqi Freedom, President Bush addressed the nation.

“And our mission is clear, to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.”

Which part of “the mission” was a lie? Which part was not accomplished?

[Cat Pride]

You are a good man Bronco. I didnt think there were many level headed conservatives to come out of Missoula.

[Cat Grad]

...when I get tired of listening to the same tired arguments, I'll simply quote one of our brilliant posters: "Sadam, Uday and that other dead goofball kid of Sadaams were mass destroyers...capable of killing many people at once."

[SonomaCat]

You are a good man Bronco. I didnt think there were many level headed conservatives to come out of Missoula.

Is the definition of a level headed conservative the ability to cut and paste Clinton and/or Kennedy screeds and insert them into strings that are critical of decisions that were made by conservatives? If so, I can say plenty of negative stuff about Democrats ... but I don't know if that makes me a level headed conservative.

I can't stand either side of the political spectrum, for the most part.

[bronco]

I knew that "you're a good man bronco" wouldn't sit well with some.

The folks who have hard core beliefs on either side of an issue aren't swayed in the least by the postings of the other side. I post for those who are on the fence and maybe haven't heard the other point of view.

The part that was a cut and paste were the quotes from the the Democrats. The same folks who have completely reversed their opinions now that they might make some political hay by bashing Bush. You'd want me to be responsible and get the quote right wouldn't you?