As nasty as it gets

townhall.com ^ | 2/02/04 | Diana West

[kattracks]

"We were misled -- misled not only in the intelligence, but misled in the way that the president took us to war ... I think there's been an enormous amount of exaggeration, stretching, deception." -- John Kerry, the Democrat who came in first in the New Hampshire primary

"The administration did cook the books." -- Howard Dean, the Democrat who came in second in the New Hampshire primary

We were misled? The Bush administration cooked the books?

Welcome to the ugliest, nastiest policy scrum Americans have ever had to referee in a presidential election year. Rather than hearing a philosophical or strategic alternative to the Bush foreign policy, we are being asked to vote Democrat because leading Democrats charge that the incumbent Republican administration willfully "misled" the American people into war -- exaggerating, stretching, and deceiving -- with a scheme to "cook the books." Are these heinous accusations true?

To be sure, inspectors in Iraq haven't found the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) President Bush and Vice President Cheney warned against. This comes as a shock to us all, including Bill Clinton, Tom Daschle, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Ted Kennedy, Jacques Chirac, Al Gore, German intelligence, Bob Graham, the United Nations, Madeleine Albright, Hans Blix, even John Kerry -- just some of the subscribers to the old Saddam-equals-WMD theory that inspired former President Clinton to warn against "the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program" six years ago.

(As recently as last October, Clinton told the prime minister of Portugal he believed Saddam Hussein possessed WMD until the end of the dictator's regime.)

Think of it (thanks to columnist William Rusher, who compiled the following set of quotations): It was then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, not Condi Rice -- or even George W. Bush -- who in 1998 said, "The risk that the leaders (of Iraq) will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security risk we face." That same year, Democratic senators including Tom Daschle, Carl Levin and current presidential front-runner John Kerry urged Clinton "to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Even Kerry-boosting, Bush-bashing Ted Kennedy got on the record about Saddam Hussein and his WMD. And in fall of 2002, Al Gore said, "We know (Saddam Hussein) has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Similar talk has come from the Bush administration, with one enormous difference. While George W. Bush recognized the same threat his predecessors recognized, he alone has been committed to acting against it. Others were content to describe the threat, to rail against it and do nothing. As Colin Powell said recently, "The president took the case to the international community and said: For 12 years, you have been defied. What are you going to do now? It's time for us to act."

It was 12 years of inaction, just as much as any illicit weapons programs, that challenged the rule of law and the peace of the world. During that same period, Islamic terrorists drew strength from perceived American weakness, planning and executing attacks that culminated in the cataclysm of Sept. 11. Not only is the world a safer place now without Saddam Hussein and his terrorist-haven nation, it is also a safer place because the Bush administration showed that the United States is as good as its word.

Former chief weapons inspector David Kay doesn't believe inspectors will ever find warehouses full of newly-minted WMD -- although he also says that because of the looting that took place during the invasion, and the Iraqi transfer of unspecified cargoes to Syria, any complete reckoning of Iraqi stockpiles is impossible.

Significant discoveries to date include an Iraqi effort circa 2003 to produce biological weaponry using the poison ricin, and evidence that Iraq tried to revive its nuclear weapons program in 2001 and 2002. According to Kay, Iraq's nuclear program never got as far as those of Libya or Iran.

Which is probably the biggest bombshell of all. Just as the CIA and other intelligence agencies were blind to Iraq's unraveling in the 1990s, when Kay believes that nation stopped trying to mass-produce WMD, Western intelligence also failed to recognize the advanced state of both Libya's and Iran's nuclear programs. "I think Baghdad was actually becoming more dangerous in the last two years than even we realized," Kay told NBC's Tom Brokaw. "Saddam was not controlling the society any longer. In the marketplace of terrorism and of WMD, Iraq could well have been that supplier if the war had not intervened."

Nothing misleading about that.

©2003 Newspaper Enterprise Assn.

Contact Diana West | Read West's biography

[xJones]

This comes as a shock to us all, including Bill Clinton, Tom Daschle, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Ted Kennedy, Jacques Chirac, Al Gore, German intelligence, Bob Graham, the United Nations, Madeleine Albright, Hans Blix, even John Kerry -- just some of the subscribers to the old Saddam-equals-WMD theory that inspired former President Clinton to warn against "the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program" six years ago.

Good summary. When it comes down to it, Saddam could have stopped playing games 6 months or more before the invasion, but he didn't for his own reasons.

Was it Arabic false pride? It cost him everything. Did he believe Chirac, Schroeder, and Putin could stave off the U.S. and Britain in the U.N. and so he held out? And did he even hope that the coalition would leave soon due to terrorist pressure while he hide in his spider holes? Questions, questions, questions....

[MEG33]

I think he's a pretty straight shooter.He managed to keep Levin and Kennedy from spinning his words ,misquoting him a taking comments out of context.He called Levin on a statement he made about Cohen's warning about antrax.

He does it firmly,politely and says he was convinced,Saddam's Generals thought the other Generals had them and he thinks Saddam was taken for a ride by his scientists who promised him more than they could deliver,but took the money.

He says the entire intelligence community believed it so we must find out how to improve.He doesn't deny there could be small piles,he's found no evidence,written or verbal of large ones.He approves of the war.

[George W. Bush]

Didn't Bush just order a full investigation of the intel failure?

Not like intel screwing us is anything new.

Of course we have to find out how and why the intel failed us. And get a better answer on the WMD question.

The author is a simmering idiot, running a high publish-or-perish fever.

Hold an investigation. It'll have just as much red meat on Dim congressional and Xlinton-era gullibility as it will on doing any real dirt to Bush 43. We need to get it out of the way now and not leave it as a live issue in the fall for the Dims to demagogue with.

[MEG33]

I'm with you ,but to find the reasons where it started really going down hill in the 70s,see Church Committee,Rockefeller Commission,Pike committee (their entire report on the CIA was leaked to the Village Voice by Daniel Schorr.)Flower children at work?

See how shamed Sen Torricelli was instrumental in shutting down the ability of the CIA to recruit undercover agents and spies in the mid 90s.I'd link if I could.I just use google.These things didn't begin last year and they cannot be fixed in a year.

[The Raven]

We need an independent investigation on the Democrats. I suspect this Bush Bashing is politically motivated, and the harm it's doing our country was not intended.

[ScaniaBoy]

Have you read Robert Baer: See no evil (Crown Publishers, NY 2002)?

Baer was a case officer for CIA in the Middle East and India from 76 to 97. A fascinating story which goes a long way to explain recent intelligence failures - when the authorities are too afraid to use humintel in case it is no-PC.

ScaniaBoy

[MEG33]

They even put the timing in a leaked memo for the insistence on an independent investigation..in this election year.

They don't want just an investigation of how the intelligence was gathered but "How it Was Used"..by the administration(Bush and Cheney)

Was it distorted,exagerrated,cherry picked,edited for a goal,etc.etc.? Investigate the President during an election year.It might just backfire...look at Clinton and impeachment.

[George W. Bush]

I'm with you ,but to find the reasons where it started really going down hill in the 70s, ...

The history of intel failures and political witch hunts isn't all that relevant. This is a politically motivated fight, not one that actually has all that much merit outside a general election season. Intel snafus aren't a surprise to anyone except the youngest voters who think the CIA/DIA/NEA are like James Bond.

What's important is to have the investigation now, not to let it simmer slowly and come to a full boil in the fall to rouse the Dim voters.

I would expect to see the investigation start ASAP with Dims howling that we need an investigation immediately but at the same time dragging their feet and trying to keep it alive as long as possible.

Bush/Rove's strategy to hold hearings now is quite shrewd. Rove is overrated but not incompetent.

[MEG33]

I have seen him on T V,and read some articles.I'll look it up,thanks.

[MEG33]

See my #9

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Americans love negative campaigning. The more negative and nasty the better. The media just likes to pump it up. It sells copy.

[Allegra]

Kerry's and the other clowns' comments featured in the beginning of this article are further proof of how desperate the Dems are.

Guess they've completely lost the economy as a whining point.

[MarkL]

Has anyone besides me noticed that the anti-Iraqi-war crowd long ago dropped the "Why aren't we invading North Korea too/instead, since we know that they already have nuclear weapons" game?

I believe that it's because they know the answer is, "Because one North Korea is enough... We don't need another one in the Middle East."

Clinton's innaction and policies are what led directly to that lunatic's possession of nuclear weapons.

Mark

[EQAndyBuzz]

"I would expect to see the investigation start ASAP with Dims howling that we need an investigation immediately but at the same time dragging their feet and trying to keep it alive as long as possible."

Didn't the "leaked" memo that Hannity reported on say that this is what the Dims are going to do? This is nothing new. It is playing right into the hands of the Dims that leaked the memo in the first place, then blamed republicans for reporting on it.

Just watch. As soon as the investigation is over, the Dims will add their own spin to it just like the memo said it would and the reps will stand by and do nothing.

I am deeply saddened by this.

[Valin]

Either through ignorance or calculation, they are a misguided treasonous bunch.

Ignorance or treason, ignorance or treason?
Boy that's a toughie. There are so many good arguments on both sides. It's the kind of question that honorable people can disagree on.

[Valin]

Let me add my small recomandation also.