The Report

The interesting thing, which will probably continue, in the discussion of the Senate Intelligence Committee report is the almost total lack of discussion of the actions of Saddam Hussein and how President Bush responded to them.

For example, you might see some who argue that as soon as President Bush received this information from the CIA that he was hell-bent on taking Hussein out. Or alternatively, that the war in Iraq was preordained as soon as the Bush Administration took office. And hey, if President Bush had attacked without consulting Congress and without getting a new resolution from the U.N. Security Council, then I might agree.

But that is not what happened. First off, the Congress debated and voted to support the President. Those that voted to support the President included John Kerry and John Edwards, though their position on the war since then has descended into incomprehensibility. Whatever the case, the issue was debated and voted on in the full light of day.

And then, President Bush went even further by engaging the U.N. Security Council and by getting (yet another) resolution that said to Hussein: Prove to us once and for all that you are not a danger, that you have kept your promises.

Or else.

No reasonable person can argue that Saddam Hussein made anything other than a token effort to comply. So he got the "or else".

I argue that President Bush did the only responsible thing he could do. President Bush had been warned by Russia that Iraq was planning terrorist attacks both here an abroad against the U.S. The CIA told him that Hussein had WMD and was seeking more. We also know that, in contrast to what some have assumed, that Iraq and Al Queda did not hate each other and did communicate.

Indeed, in the post 9/11 environment and under those circumstances, one might be able to argue that President Bush waited too long. Instead, President Bush took the long and responsible view:

Allow Saddam Hussein to prove he is not a danger before taking action.

Comments

[Another Dreamer]

"No reasonable person can argue that Saddam Hussein made anything other than a token effort to comply. So he got the "or else"."

See, that's just one of the many things you're wrong about. If you had been paying close attention at the time, EVERYTHING Saddam said and did after the resolution and before the bombs dropped, was legit. NOTHING he said was innacurate. He claimed to have no WMD...guess what he had no WMD. The fact is, there's nothing he could have done to prevent the US from attacking because a lot of powerful people were thirsty for oil.

[Blind Pig]

You are kidding with the Saddam Hussein apologist act, right?

I'll have to let your comment stand on it's own.