The "vulcans", the PHD non military people such as Dr. Rice and Dr.
Wolfowitz, posited that the best way to secure Middle East oil, the
only region with spare capacity and the greatest known reserves, was
democracy.
The way they thought this could happen is if a major country in the
region went democratic - then they thought democracy would "spread
like wildfire".
Iraq was the most politically feasible to invade which is why, after
9/11, the Vulcans immediately tried to link Iraq. Surprisingly it was
Sec Rumsfeld that pursued going after Afghanistan first.
In any event, Mr. Bush, who is an on-faith decision maker, felt this
oil argument may be true, but that the US had another duty, to
liberate people. He felt that, no matter what the facts were,
liberating Iraqis would be for the better.
This is why Mr. Bush ignored these CIA reports and ignored his
Generals that were direct reports (Powell, Zini).
Mr Bush has described this all himself!
When Mr. Woodward asked Mr. Bush why he really invaded Iraq Mr. Bush replied,
"I believe we have a duty to free people, to liberate people"
When Mr. Woodward asked if that was "dangerously paternalistic", Mr.
Bush "bristled",
" We (Mr. Blair, Mr. Bush) have a zeal for liberating people, and
that, to some elites, might appear paternalistic."
So that's it - Mr. Bush made a "gut call" that freeing Iraqis would
stop terrorism and secure oil because it was the "right" thing to do.
The point is Mr. Bush didn't make a factual decision so I doubt he
would taken the analytical role Andy is attributing to him. He simply
believed that liberating people must be good, and he did it.
The Vulcans and others had different ideas, but for Mr. Bush is just
as he told Mr. Woodward.
----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Ousterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:53:02 -0500
Subject: RE: CIA warned Bush not to invade Iraq
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Come-on folks, do really believe that the only reports created and sent to
Bush positively supported the war? Even if that were true, he would have
requested a negative assessment to understand the downside, then would have
considered the probability of each scenario and then made his decision. More
non-news on slow news day.
Andy
-----Original Message-----
From: Harkins, Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 8:47 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: CIA warned Bush not to invade Iraq
Maybe it arrived whiles Bush's readers were on holiday! ...
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Howie Hamlin
>
>
>Prewar Assessment on Iraq Saw Chance of Strong Divisions
>By DOUGLAS JEHL and DAVID E. SANGER
Outbound email scanned for viruses. (e230)________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
