Quote Originally Posted by selil View Post
You know if the POTUS has said that we should consider the "Iraq" invasion as a magnet to terrorists and a sacrificial lamb for force projection. I might be a lot happier today. If they had said the GWOT needs a front for an asymmetric non-state enemy and we can make one where none exists it would have been a lot more honest.
more problems than Blair did have and Bush probably would not have gotten the resolution through our Congress -- even though he earlier bought Democratic support with the Agriculture Bill and Steel Tariffs he did not like.

Not to excuse the absolutely pathetic job the Admin did of 'selling' the war but their hands were sort of tied -- telling the harsh truth wouldn't have gotten the support to launch. Saying that "We've got to stand up to these minor league bullies or they'll nickel and dime us to death" wouldn't have resonated then any more than the WMD ploy does in retrospect. I think he understood that a line had to be drawn and was afraid his successor in '04 or '08 would not do what he thought needed to be done. He went early in case he missed reelection in '04 and that created problems of its own.

As I've often said, I wouldn't have done it that way -- but I do quite strongly agree that something along that line needed to be done. I'm not a Bush fan but I'll give him credit for doing something that needed to be done; something that his four predecessors had sluffed.