SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (180)2/1/2004 2:26:51 PM
From: Skywatcher  Respond to of 173976
 
More two faced lies from Congolisa rice
Op-Ed Columnist: The Mirror Has Two Faces

February 1, 2004
By MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

Why is the foreign policy nanny acting like a foreign
policy ninny?

Hitting the morning shows to do damage control after David
Kay's scalding admission that we flew to war on a false
premise, Condi Rice made a tyro error. She mirrored.

Saddam, she told Matt Lauer, had secretively refused to
account for missing stockpiles of botulinum toxin and
anthrax, even though he knew he would face serious
consequences: "I don't know how you could have come to any
other conclusion but that he had weapons of mass
destruction."

A conservative, ice-skating Brahms aficionada from
Birmingham had assumed that a homicidal, grenade-fishing
Sinatra aficionado from Tikrit reasoned just like her.

Bush officials, awash in the vice president's Hobbesian
gloom, deduced that Saddam would not hide if he had nothing
to hide. Even after all their talk about a Bernard Lewis
clash of civilizations and a battle of good versus evil,
they still projected a Western mind-set on Saddam.

Ms. Rice argued that the U.S. was right to conclude that
Saddam had W.M.D. and attack him because the dictator was
not behaving rationally. But why did she think someone
President Bush deemed "a madman" would behave rationally?

Cheney & Company were so consumed with puffing the
intelligence to try to connect Saddam with 9/11, Al Qaeda
and nuclear material, they failed to challenge basic
assumptions.


The closer the inspectors got to the truth that Iraq didn't
have weapons, the more the Bush hawks asserted that only
war would uncover weapons. Their threats to Saddam made him
bluff that he had the weapons that they said he had.

"Most intelligence failures are about missing something
happening," said a former Bush official. "What's so bizarre
about this is, they thought something was happening that
wasn't. This is right up there with Pearl Harbor and Bay of
Pigs."

Even Paul Wolfowitz observed last May that it was important
not to assume that foes like Saddam "will be rational
according to our definition of what is rational."
Interviewed by Sam Tanenhaus for Vanity Fair, Mr. Wolfowitz
said bad intelligence came from mirror imaging - assuming
people would behave like us: "The kind of mistake that, in
a sense, I think we made implicitly in assuming that anyone
who was intelligent enough to fly an airplane wouldn't
commit suicide with it."

Saddam's old lieutenants have said that the dictator did
not admit his paucity of weapons because he wanted his Arab
neighbors to see him as a great leader and he hoped to
deter America from war.

Jerrold Post, a former C.I.A. psychological profiler who
calls Saddam messianic but not irrational, speculates that
he may have built a Potemkin arsenal after his conventional
arsenal was decimated in the first Persian Gulf war. "If he
came across as an impotent leader capitulating to the
West," Dr. Post said, "he might have been pushed out of
power or killed."

Besides, according to Dr. Kay, Saddam was both finagling
and finagled. "Did he really think he had the stuff because
scientists were scared to tell him he didn't?" wondered a
G.O.P. foreign policy expert.

Saddam was isolated. And the Bush hawks wanted to isolate
themselves from less-paranoid allies. They had come into
office itching to replay the '91 war and try out their
democracy domino theory in the Middle East - mirror imaging
writ large. They grabbed 9/11 as an opening, yanked power
away from Colin Powell and persuaded the popular diplomat
to compromise his integrity by touting sketchy evidence at
the U.N., with the puppet Tenet as his wingman.

The moral of Vietnam was supposed to be that we would never
again go to war without understanding the culture of our
antagonists, or exaggerate their threat to us.

Some of those involved in running the '91 Iraq war think
the U.S. should cut its losses, forget about Iowa-style
caucuses (mirroring again), get the U.N. in there and let
Kofi Annan and the Iraqi Governing Council negotiate with
Ayatollah Sistani, who won't talk to the U.S. anyway.

The White House will have a lot of explaining to do if Iraq
exchanges one form of dictatorship for another, or if it
takes on a fundamentalist Islamic cast that sets Iraqi
women's rights back 40 years.

"These guys created the exact can of worms we tried to
avoid," said a Bush 41 official. "Guess what? Baghdad is
ours."

E-mail: liberties@nytimes.com

nytimes.com



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (180)2/1/2004 3:04:13 PM
From: longnshort  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 173976
 
Pat, yeah those repubs were voting for Sharpton or dean to screw the Dems. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out. Or does it?