To: Lando Lincoln; Howlin; FairOpinion; backhoe; redlipstick; cyncooper; MEG33; Grampa Dave; ...
Much of this is not news to many of us who have gathered up the snippets of these stories where we could find them. Nevertheless, it leaves me wondering: why the heck isn't the Bush admin out there making this point? Timmerman lays it all out neatly; they could use his outline.
17 posted on
04/26/2004 7:48:15 AM PDT by
MizSterious
(First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
To: MizSterious
That's the thing. The Bush Admin is going along with the "we had bad intel about WMD" line. They have shifted to the "democracy and UN legitimacy" rationale. Wouldnt they be out there making this case if they believed it? What gives?
23 posted on
04/26/2004 7:53:20 AM PDT by
Huck
(In the Soviet Union, the Admin Moderators ruled.)
To: MizSterious
Nevertheless, it leaves me wondering: why the heck isn't the Bush admin out there making this point?Good question. Of course, we can only speculate as to the answer. My take is that there already is an awful lot on the administration's plate. Right now, the UN is a useful tool for legitimizing the new Iraqi government and upcoming elections. I think the President is trying to focus on the sovereignty hand-over in Juse, and is trying to keep a lid on the whole mess until after our own election. If my speculation is accurate, I don't agree with this approach. Better to let the whole putrid mess blow sky high.
118 posted on
04/26/2004 2:57:21 PM PDT by
Wolfstar
(Our place in this war? On the political front lines, as our Armed Forces fight on the battle lines.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson