Your argument is that we should always act, under any circumstances, when there's probably not an imminent threat (from an organization far less powerful than any state) but that we should never, under any circumstances, ever, ever act before there's an imminent threat from a state with the financial power of the world's second largest oil reserves that has spent 20 years attempting to acquire nuclear weapons?
Closer to ten years, most of which were prior to the first war. Where is the evedence that he was seeking nukes in the last 10 years? You are attempting to use propaganda that has been discredited to make your argument.
If President Bush had ordered the invasion of Afghanistan in August of 2001, I'm sure of two things. One, 9/11 would have happened anyways (the plotters were already in the country). Two, you, Tom, and the Fool would be urging the impeachment of the President for an unprovoked attack on a foreign power.
But what if he'd reacted to the warnings he got. Dozens and dozens of them. What if he had "shaken the bushes" put a few facts together, ID some of those possible terrorists? What if he had held high level meetings and prioritized anti-terror? I'm not saying that it's a sure thing that the attacks would have been stopped, but you at least have to consider the possibility. There was certainly a degree of immanence in the summer of 2001 that there _never_ was wrt Iraq.
But that's not the important thing. The attacks are history and there is nothing we can do to take them back. The most important mistake that was made and is still being made is that the administration refuses to admit any culpability whatsoever. We get the impression from them that they did everything that they could have done, that they made no mistakes, that they are the picture of strength and competency and that just is not the case. We can't begin to fix a problem until we admit there was one and this the Bush administration refuses to do, instead blaming the bureaucracy or the Clinton administration or any number of factors they considered beyond their control.
And worse yet, they have hindered any attempt to get to the root of the security lapses that made the 9/11 attack possible; opposing the formation of the investigation and refusing to cooperate with it fully.
-- Doug
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
