CIA Blamed For Lack Of WMD's

Mϋzikdϋde

Simply Fabulous
Sep 19, 2002
3,970
258
60
Colorado Springs
Visit site
✟20,525.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Existential1 said:
I'm saying that their culpability goes much deeper than anyhting you suggest.
Namely, that this pair took two countries to war against another, based on their own conviction, and their own perspective of conviction: I'm saying that we went to war, crucially, because we had two somewhat fundamentalist Christians at the helm.
In doing this, in acting on conviction, they both somewhat subverted domestic and international institutions and processes, that have been laboriously built up to protect the human world.
They acted to block out contrary opinion, of all sorts: they took us to war, without sufficient domestic and international consensus, and with insufficient legal authorisation.

In their conviction, they brought fascism into our democratic processes: they made Christianity, as the backdrop to their conviction, into a variant of democratic fascism

They cannot now slide away from accountability, by saying that the intel was at fault.

I would be shocked if, on this side of the Atlantic, the Butler report similarly gives impression of exonorating Tony Blair.
If it does, British constitutional process would be in major crisis: as that suggestion of exoneration as regards intel; will just not be plausible to a large part of the British electorate.
My suspicion is that Tony Blair might well resign following this Butler report.

As another poster said: this US report does not look at the GWB handling of the intel; it merely looks at the intel, in terms of some criteria of what is satisfactory in intel.
Americans have more reverence for their leaders than do we: I would not expect even this second report, to be effectively critical of GWB; perhaps especially if he were to be ellected for a second term.

I think that what is involved in judging Bush and Blair: is the biggest test that the western world has faced, since WW2.
If we do not act to find their style of leadership wanting, and put in place the necessary safeguards, to prevent such adventure happening again: then the world faces a progressive slide into democratic fascism, government by opinion formation, rather than on the basis of facts and evidence.
Growing terorism is a threat: but, the threat to the world posed by this democratic fascism, Christian flavoured as it has become with this pair; poses an infinitely greater threat.
You don't have to convince me of anything. I really don't have much of an opinion, other than the feeling that our country is basically doomed no matter what the outcome of this year's election.
I can't wait to see what Kerry does about Iraq. Think he'll just pull us out and let them have their civil war? Or will he keep us there for the 5-10 years it'll take to put the place back together?
 
Upvote 0

crazyfingers

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2002
8,733
329
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟18,923.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
the_cheat said:
Muzikdude, I don't doubt that Bush may have been misinformed, but I'm concerned that part of the reason he was misinformed may have been a lack of critical thinking ability. That's not the kind of trait I want my president to have, you know?

Through the whole buildup to war, Bush & Co. made assertion after assertion with essentially no evidence. Unfortunately, too many people simply believed them on faith.
 
Upvote 0

Existential1

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2004
1,591
74
Caputh, Perthshire
✟2,128.00
Faith
Mϋzikdϋde said:
You don't have to convince me of anything. I really don't have much of an opinion, other than the feeling that our country is basically doomed no matter what the outcome of this year's election.
I can't wait to see what Kerry does about Iraq. Think he'll just pull us out and let them have their civil war? Or will he keep us there for the 5-10 years it'll take to put the place back together?

Kerry and Edwards wont move on this, even perspectivally, until and if they are elected.

Prediction: K&E will attempt an intellectual paradigm shift, a la Roosevelt New Deal; perhaps a la New Society of the 60's/70's; perhaps a la Tony Blair as he moved away from Old Labour.
The crisis is as you indicate, and there are lots who feel this: and lots who will move once the momentum starts to shift to new perspective; so it has an electoral base to appeal to, for second term re-election.

In Brit Gordon Brown has made the economy both strong, and socially responsible: and this has been the real vehicle for Blairism.
K&E have to also get the economy right: and if they do that; then they would easily get second term, and bed in the new international, "place among the nations" paradigm.

If I was advising Kerry: and if Edwards was up to the job, and if delegating would electorally sell; then I would let Edwards turn around the intervention mess in the middle east, leaving Kerry to sell the new paradigm.
The slogan "Place among the nations" would fit the bill.
Above all, K&E should sell "principled pragmatism": and have a foot soldier battalion beavering away, to ensure the GWB legacy was passed to history as unmitigated incompotence.


BTW, I suffered a musical seismic shock the other day.
Gene Vincent is built into my foundations, just through familiarity with his popular songs and music.
Ian Dury raised him to the rank of saint, as "sweet Gene Vincent, there's one in very town".
He was for me the essence of British rock, as it evolved through Jazz.
But, the seismic shock. Gene Vincent is American.
I'll survive, but talk about turning worlds upside down.
 
Upvote 0