Jlallen, re: >>"Based upon all the information we had at the time...the decision was justified on many levels....its not too early to tell.....
You can't have it both ways. On one hand you say that assessing intelligence requires judgement, and on the other you say that based "upon all the information we had AT THE TIME... the decision was justified..."
To be considered wise, an administration would have to be able to claim to have sorted through such information, consulted with the various experts with different opinions and chosen the path that offered the least risk with the most potential for gain. It's not enough to say that there was some information out there which they "chose" to believe. They must have chosen correctly. This is especially true where it now appears clear that many intelligence experts inside our own government were stating that they could NOT support the conclusions that the hawks reached.
Even if the information could be said to be wrong but nonetheless considered the best we had at the time, their timing, method and post invasion course leave them open to tremendous criticisms. As I've inferred, history will judge them by the success or failure of the Iraqi adventure. If America and her interests are damaged appreciably, if American lives are wasted and American wealth is squandered, if Iraqis end up living under another chaotic, ruthless rule, and if terrorists are aided by our actions in Iraq, history will judge this president as the most reckless and senseless in history.
It's known as the rule of "accountability." |
