[OldManMac]

The stink just keeps getting stronger and stronger. How many more lies and how much more deceit do we have to hear before these scoundrels are removed from office? How many more of our sons and daughters have to be killed and injured because of these people?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/27/wa...mp;oref=slogin

WASHINGTON, April 26 — George J. Tenet, the former director of central intelligence, has lashed out against Vice President Dick Cheney and other Bush administration officials in a new book, saying they pushed the country to war in Iraq without ever conducting a “serious debate” about whether Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat to the United States..............

“There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat,” Mr. Tenet writes in a devastating judgment that is likely to be debated for many years. Nor, he adds, “was there ever a significant discussion” about the possibility of containing Iraq without an invasion.................

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-fa...m_b_47083.html

Comes now George Tenet. In those days, as CIA director, Tenet was the man who sat so visibly and solemnly behind Colin Powell during Powell's crucial UN speech presenting "proof" of the WMD threat from Iraq. Tenet's sober presence suggested how powerful America's evidence must be. In those days, Tenet was inseparable from President Bush and from the argument that, as the inescapable next step in the "war on terror," America had to invade Iraq. On December 2, 2004, Tenet was at the White House for perhaps the most cynically dishonorable day in the history of American public service: the day when the freshly reelected President Bush awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to three men: the one who publicly vouched for a misleading case for invading Iraq (Tenet); the one who beat Saddam's army but was entirely uninterested in what came next (Gen. Tommy Franks), and the one who helped turned that next stage into a catastrophe (Amb. L. Paul "Jerry" Bremer III)..........

[subego]

Originally Posted by KarlG 

“There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat,”

Originally Posted by KarlG 

Tenet was inseparable from President Bush and from the argument that, as the inescapable next step in the "war on terror," America had to invade Iraq.

This is like, old news. Read it all in Cobra II. Furthermore, as much as you want to see an inconsistency in these positions, there isn't one.

The war wasn't about the Iraqi threat, the war was sold with the Iraqi threat. Big difference.

Either way, wars not being about what they're sold with is really old news. Prehistoric even. No need to stop the presses for that.

[OldManMac]

I see; so that's how it's justified this time.

[subego]

Originally Posted by KarlG 

I see; so that's how it's justified this time.

Not a 100% sure what you are saying here, but I think the answer is: yes, this time and all other times.

This would be A/K/A "the ends justify the means".

While this may not apply to you specifically, had the ends been more in line with what was imagined, most people wouldn't have given a rat's ass that the truth was distorted to get us there. Things don't go exactly as planned, and all of the sudden people get filled with piss and vinegar over it.

Call me crazy, but these positions don't seem particularly consistent.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by subego 

This is like, old news. Read it all in Cobra II. Furthermore, as much as you want to see an inconsistency in these positions, there isn't one.

The war wasn't about the Iraqi threat, the war was sold with the Iraqi threat. Big difference.

Either way, wars not being about what they're sold with is really old news. Prehistoric even. No need to stop the presses for that.

This reminds me of the excuses of men caught cheating or people caught cheating or any similar hand-in-cookie-jar moments.

"Oh, everyone does it."

Listen if what's right and wrong doesn't interest you at all, fine, but is it really worth saying out loud.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

This reminds me of the excuses of men caught cheating or people caught cheating or any similar hand-in-cookie-jar moments.

"Oh, everyone does it."

Listen if what's right and wrong doesn't interest you at all, fine, but is it really worth saying out loud.

Not excusing it so much as keeping it in perspective.

To put it in terms of your analogy, someone has their hand in the cookie jar, and is using their other hand to beat their own face to a bloody pulp.

Neither of us should care about the cookie jar hand.

Likewise, had the administration succeeded in forming something relatively stable rather than a bloody mess, almost no one would care at all about the means that got us there (the cookie jar hand). It seems to me that those who are fine with such things when they're successful, but have a big problem with them when they aren't successful... well, these are the people who don't care about right and wrong.

What's right in this situation (as I believe we agree) is fixing our mess. The cookie jar is so insignificant at this point as to border on irrelevant.

[Orion27]

I think it would be just fine if we asked for Tenet to return the Medal of Freedom. The man is a disgrace. He four years late coming to the party with his sob story. The award was questionable then, and it should certainly be viewed as a mistake now. The CIA failed the President and the the American people. That has been made clear since 9/11. The CIA has chosen to to make this political, which also highlights the lie when Tentet proclaims the CIA
is apolitical when it comes to policy. Tenet is Clinton's guy. Bush cleaned house when he came into office. His mistake was keep this traitor Tenet. I have to believe we are not getting the whole story. Tenet never directly attacks the President but in effect defends him. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/wa...ref=washington

From NRO_http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2FiNWI4MTYyMjYzNzcxYjA0MzA0OGVhZWFhN2ZiNjM=

1. Tenet met every morning with President Bush. Indeed, he was the point person at the national-security briefing — the daily session Bush, from the beginning of his presidency, has made a point of taking more seriously than his predecessor did. Tenet now claims that in the summer of 2001, he was convinced al Qaeda was on the verge of launching a spectacular, multiple-site attack against the United States. He was convinced the United States should take action against the terror network in its Afghanistan safe haven. But, he maintains he shared this information only with (then) National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, not the president.
Why, day after day after day, didn’t he advise the president of his suspicions? “Because,” Tenet says, “the United States government doesn’t work that way. The president is not the action officer. You bring the action to the national-security adviser and people who set the table for the president to decide on policies they’re gonna implement.”

Sure, Mr. Director. Just one question: What the hell goes on at the daily briefings?

[Macrobat]

Perhaps, KarlG, you should investigate further which horse you place your saddle on, Tenet is not a good choice:

George Tenet's Imaginary Encounter...

Tenet book fires back at Cheney - baltimoresun.com

Seems Tenet has been caught trying to cover his lily-white ass by attempting to deflect the blame for years.

The biggest problem he has is that HE was PERSONALLY responsible for the dissemination of this intelligence information, and - as the SOLE holdover from the Clinton years - should have been the MOST informed.

Bottom line, bot the 9/11 attacks and the invasion were based on bad intelligence. Intelligence gathered by the CIA when TENET was in charge. Given, the CIA had been emasculated (just like the military) under the Clinton administration.

The CIA had been the Left's favorite whipping boy, with the DoD a close second, for decades before the Clinton culture of hatred for anything in uniform was elected to two straight terms.

Tenet is complicit in both the above cited intelligence gaffs, and now he is desperately attempting to move away from scrutiny.

Problem is, the BDS crowd will swallow it hook, line, and sinker.

[OldManMac]

I don't know who's horse you think I'm putting my saddle on, but the ultimate facts remain that we were misled and lied to, and our children in Iraq, as well as untold numbers of Iraqis, are dying for nothing.

[Macrobat]

Oh please, you originated this thread to push an anti-Bush agenda, using the lying, conniving Tenet as your horse to ride in on, there are TONS of accusations of being misled and lied to, but NONE of them has been proven absolutely - which should tell you something - in other words, NOT facts. If they ARE facts, the chances are well above 80% that TENET was the one doing the lying and misleading, as the head of the CIA.

Not to mention the PROVEN lies BY TENET I posted above.

Tenet leaves one with that slimey "I need a shower" feeling that the vast majority of the Clinton Administration always seemed (seems) to ooze.

And, please, there is not one of "our children" in Iraq. Every single servicemember is an adult, and more then 98% of them support the mission, according to the latest polls, so save your crocodile tears.

Even larger "untold numbers of Iraqis" were dying before the invasion because of the sanctions and the practices of the Hussein regime - or did you conveniently forget all the mass graves that were, and still are, being discovered?

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

And, please, there is not one of "our children" in Iraq. Every single servicemember is an adult, and more then 98% of them support the mission

QFT

[Orion27]

As as analysis of Tenet's book continues, the more one begins confrim to most if not all of the reasons for going to war were if not written in stone ( slam dunk anyone?) were given enough credibility by the CIA, the President was compelled to act. This includes, in Tenets's words, ties to Al Qaida, WMDS, biological as well as nuclear weapons. This is the same intelligence Congress received whom we all know voted to go to war. The fact the Democrats have politicised this war so viciously, without taking any responsibility is sad. I haven't heard from Harry Reid in over a week. They must have him tied up in a burlap bag somewhere. The amount of backstabbing and disloyalty I have witnessed in the past two years is just breathtaking. The only headline to come out of the mainstream media about Tenets book has been the "allegation" by Tenet of all people that there was no debate within the administration prior to going to war. The american don't buy that premise because we all witnesed the debate. For those who care to pursue Tenet's own words and testimony prior to the war. One can read an two interesting pieces here:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/...he_knew_i.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...3/596texms.asp

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...FiYzUyZjgxYTA=

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

Tenet leaves one with that slimey "I need a shower" feeling that the vast majority of the Clinton Administration always seemed (seems) to ooze.

I think we already understand your hatred of the Democratic party.

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

And, please, there is not one of "our children" in Iraq. Every single servicemember is an adult, and more then 98% of them support the mission, according to the latest polls, so save your crocodile tears.

They may not be children as in pre-adolescent(sp?), but they are someones child regardless of age. If you had a son or daugther that was killed in service, even if you agreed with the reason they were there, you would still be greatly saddened. Also, do you have a source for this poll?

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

Even larger "untold numbers of Iraqis" were dying before the invasion because of the sanctions and the practices of the Hussein regime - or did you conveniently forget all the mass graves that were, and still are, being discovered?

The Hussein regime did kill an ungodly amount of people. Weren't they mostly Kurds or was it at random?

[Macrobat]

I don not hate the Democrat Party, I hate where some of its most prominent members are taking it. What I hate is the smarm and slime surrounding the Clintons.

Everyone is someone's child, I never said a thing about that. I was clearly castigating the Left's constant "zomg!!! teh chilluns!!!" cries. Bottom line - they are all - to a person - adults, capable of making their own decisions.

One of my posters put a link up at my webstie, I will do a search for the poll.

Saddam basically killed anyone who even looked at him sideways. And it wasn't just Saddam himself, Uday and Qusay even massacred their own brothers-in-law and their families.

In the meantime, there is a poll which came out today saying that 72% of the troops support withdrawal in a year. This seems significant until you notice the size of the sampling - 944 whole people. And that the poll was conducted "pre-surge."

Stars & Stripes: Poll of troops in Iraq sees 72% support for withdrawal within a year

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

I don not hate the Democrat Party, I hate where some of its most prominent members are taking it. What I hate is the smarm and slime surrounding the Clintons.

Understood.

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

Everyone is someone's child, I never said a thing about that. I was clearly castigating the Left's constant "zomg!!! teh chilluns!!!" cries. Bottom line - they are all - to a person - adults, capable of making their own decisions.

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

Saddam basically killed anyone who even looked at him sideways. And it wasn't just Saddam himself, Uday and Qusay even massacred their own brothers-in-law and their families.

Truly sad. I've always thought getting rid of him was a good thing, I just never agreed with the way it was done or the deceptive reasoning.

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

In the meantime, there is a poll which came out today saying that 72% of the troops support withdrawal in a year. This seems significant until you notice the size of the sampling - 944 whole people. And that the poll was conducted "pre-surge."

Not a very reflective poll when it's such a small percentage. When sampling small amounts of people, it's easy to create a poll in the favor of the one conducting it.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

I don not hate the Democrat Party, I hate where some of its most prominent members are taking it. What I hate is the smarm and slime surrounding the Clintons.

Psst. The Clintons are out of office, and Hillary isn't going to get back in. I don't like them either.

Everyone is someone's child, I never said a thing about that. I was clearly castigating the Left's constant "zomg!!! teh chilluns!!!" cries. Bottom line - they are all - to a person - adults, capable of making their own decisions.

I was speaking figuratively, and many of them are barely adults. I was in the service during the Vietnam era, and I thought I knew a lot about the world also; I didn't know jack sh!t. Just because someone passes the magical age of eighteen, doesn't mean they've crossed some boundary.

Saddam basically killed anyone who even looked at him sideways. And it wasn't just Saddam himself, Uday and Qusay even massacred their own brothers-in-law and their families.

Saddam was a despot, no doubt, but there are many despots and dictators around the world that we ignore and even support when it's politically expedient. The U. S. has a long history of helping to overthrow leaders it doesn't agree with and of putting people into power who are dictators and tyrants, and it's all because of political expediency, and has nothing to do with concern over which leader massacred whom.

In the meantime, there is a poll which came out today saying that 72% of the troops support withdrawal in a year. This seems significant until you notice the size of the sampling - 944 whole people. And that the poll was conducted "pre-surge."

Stars & Stripes: Poll of troops in Iraq sees 72% support for withdrawal within a year

If you knew anything about statistics, you would know that a larger sample size doesn't always equate with a more accurate analysis. A well designed poll could arrive at a high level of confidence with a relatively low sample size. I'm not saying that's the case here, as you and I don't know, but that's not enough of a reason to dismiss it off-hand.