That he planned, had already decided, to invade Iraq early suggests that the decision process was deceptive, that he was predisposed to go to war so he either intentionally twisted the intelligence to fit his decision and lied to us or mistakenly saw in it what he wanted to see because of his predisposition and rushed to judgment.
You could look at it that way, but I don't. I see it as based on an accurate prediction of what Saddam Hussein would do, given many years of past engagement.
I also see it as a massive show of force, because Saddam had played rope-a-dope with us and the UN for so long he had to think he could do it forever. Or, as Thomas P.M. Barnett puts it, "we're coming in six months. We're coming in three months. We're coming in one month. We're coming next Tuesday." And we did.
What was far less predictable, at least to me, was what the UN would do to pressure Saddam, and how that would play out. As it turned out, Saddam had the UN sussed, and to some extent, paid off.
He either didn't believe Bush or didn't care. Either way, Bush was right to prepare for any eventuality, including what happened.
The only people I know who feel otherwise are ones who felt it was wrong to invade, period. Wrong to invade, therefore wrong to prepare to invade. |
