Kerry and Edwards: "Bad Intelligence Costs Lives"

[Q]

Bad Iraq Intelligence Cost Lives, Kerry and Edwards Say
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JODI WILGOREN

In a joint interview, John Kerry and John Edwards said that slipshod intelligence invoked by the president to invade Iraq had cost the nation lives, money and prestige. - http://nytimes.com/

----

- So then...is it fair to say that Kerry and Edwards blame 'bad intelligence' and not 'bad judgment' on Bush's* part? Certainly they've read the MINORITY REPORT on prewar Intel that plainly states that Bush* lied, exaggerated and manipulated intelligence to get the war he and the PNAC had been planning for years?

- If they haven't read it...can someone send them a copy of the REAL report on Iraq and Bush*? So the 'slipshod intelligence INVOKED Bush* to attack? Yeah, sure.

[still_one]

1. Interesting BS

I saw John Kerry and John Edwards on 60 minutes.

It was "WRONG" to go into Iraq.

Remember Afganistan, al queada, Oshma bin Laden, Mullough Omar(sic)?

Saying that you received bad information is not enough. It was a mistake, and it should be admitted as such.

Greg Thielmann, Richard Clarke, and a cast of other government officials knew it was a mistake. I knew it was a mistake. Now both Afganistan, Iraq, and the entire middle east are a mess because we didn't focus in Afganistan where we should have.

They had better get there act together on this issue, or they will lose.

Incidently, I will vote for Kerry/Edwards no matter what...

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. The bad intelligence

was the moran who stole the presidency.

It was his decision to start a war based on intelligence that he knew wasn't solid.

[still_one]

4. Yes, but there were very few in Congress who had the courage

to express an opposite point of view, even though they should have known better. Quite a few others did.

That Kerry and Edwards do not clearly indicate that the war in Iraq was a mistake which they blame on bad intelligence, does not give them much credibility. Enough people in multiple admistrations advised that Iraq was not an Immenient threat. Why didn't they?

Greg Thielmann, Colin Powell's main advisor, told them they were not a threat!

[Malva Zebrina]

3. they can say nothing else

and they are being as much as the political spinners as
Bush and I really hate that.

In this case it is really more of the same as Bush, sorry to say. That they have chosen to take that route is very discouncerting to me.

*I prefer a little less spin and a little more honesty. I do not like the feeling that I am being lied to because of the game of politics.

[still_one]

5. And our soldiers are pawns in this game of death

[DoYouEverWonder]

7. I think that is why

Kerry and Edwards are afraid to make W's mishandling of Iraq a big issue. Lives are literally at stake.

[emulatorloo]

9. See my post 8 - they are saying a lot more. . . .

[KittyWampus]

10. They Could Start Mentioning The OSP

couldn't they?

Has Kerry?

[Malva Zebrina]

14. Yup--no one has

we are getting fluff and emotional appeals.

[Guaranteed]

6. Weak.

Too bad.

[emulatorloo]

11. the president "abused the intelligence and the information"

See my post 8

[emulatorloo]

8. KERRY ***PLACES THE BLAME ON BUSH!*** (did you read the interview?????)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/10/politics/campaign/11TEXT.html

<Snip>


And this president not only abused the intelligence and the information, for which he is responsible, not just Mr. Tenet - not just the vice president, not Secretary Rumsfeld - the president. You know, Harry Truman's sign didn't say, "The buck stops at the Pentagon," or "The buck stops at the intelligence agency," and the fact is that we authorized the president to use force in a responsible way, and I have said for months, you know, I have said it to you, I have said it across the country: this president abused the authority that he was given, by abusing his own promises to the country as to how he would build a coalition and how he would go to war.

Over a period of time, there were a number of misleading statements made by the president. He certainly misled America about nuclear involvement. And he misled America about the types of weapons that were there, and he misled America about how he would go about using the authority he was given. "Going to war as a last resort" means something to me. The president did not go to war as a last resort, period. Moreover it's the responsibility of a president, if you are going to go to war, having said we're going to do all that's necessary, to do all that's necessary. He didn't. Because he had no plan for winning the peace. It is utterly extraordinary the level of miscalculation of this administration, as to what they would find in Iraq and what was going to be necessary. They discarded their own professional military evaluations, from General Shinseki and others, they disrespected professional military careers, turned their backs on their own State Department's plans, and arrogantly believed. . . . And they were wrong. And soldiers lost their lives because they were wrong. And America's paying -billions of dollars because they were wrong, and allies are not with us because they were wrong. I think there is no greater responsibility of the president of the United States.

<Snip>

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. But, refuses to take responsibility for his vote of support for Bush.

And, his continuing support for the occupation.

Somebody should tell him about where the buck stops.

[emulatorloo]

13. He accepts responsibility, but wont give a sound bite for the next Bush Ad

Kerry wants to internationalize and get us out ASAP.
Bush wants to keep us there indefinately while he figures out who to invade next.

This is Bush's war, not John Kerry's.

There is nothing to be gained from endlessly bashing Dems and excusing George W Bush for abusing the office of the Presidency.

[Pastiche423]

15. John Kerry voted for bush's war

And still supports it.

There really is no way to spin the fact that both warmongering dems voted YES w/the whole world watching.

They did it.
They own it.