Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (130160)	4/26/2004 11:11:52 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

So here's the question: Where was the gimlet-eyed follow-up, the hard-nosed executive evaluation, the painstaking dissection of the evidence that any commander in chief should insist upon before deciding on war? Excuse me, isn't that the job of the CIA? Since when is the President supposed to be intelligence-officer-in-chief? Bush had been skeptical, but the head of the CIA had just told him that Saddam's WMDS was a "slam-dunk case". Was he supposed to ignore the information? What do you want from him? Now, if Tenet had told him it was a marginal case, and Bush went forward anyway, then you could criticize. But that's not what happened. It belies obvious and painstaking partisanship to place the blame for this incident anywhere but on Tenet, who was obviously responsible for it.