With his level of intelligence and clearance, I’d say yes, he did, and does…which makes his conduct running up to the war all the more depressing and disappointing.
My reaction to the UNSC speech was a long the lines of “watching the person you thought was there vanish before your eyes”.
I was tempted to believe Powell too…But, I think it was somewhere around that time that (or maybe a couple weeks later?) that a message from Bin Laden was released and Powell jumped on it to say that it showed how Saddam and Bin Laden were in league together. Since I could see from the clear text, available to all, that this was not the case, I reminded myself that this person was no longer credible. I almost wondered if a part of Powell (subconsciously?) said something so obviously false just in order to clue the rest of us in: “Look folks, for whatever reasons (believing I can do more from within than without?), I’ve drunk the Kool-Aid. Don’t believe anything I say anymore.”
A position that your boss and I shared right up until I watched him bob and weave through his testimony to the UN. At that point, I lost all respect that I had previously had for him. I still maintain that even had he experienced a moment of testicular fortitude back then that the US would still be tits deep in Iraqle simply because invasion was something that a number of people in the administration had been gunning for for quite some time. I think Powell was trotted out as a way of saying, “See! Saddam’s a bad, bad man. Now, let’s get 'im!”
Colin’s testicles finally dropped!
Yeah, dropped in. Here’s to hoping that they’ll stick around.
It seems to me that those now in power, believing that their ends justify any means (and that since God is on their side they can do no wrong), see it as their right, even their duty, to achieve those ends by whatever works. Fear and the lust for revenge work quite well, especially when overlaid on xenophobia. I’d posit further that most Americans’ self-image as the Good Guy in the white hat makes them vulnerable to a rationale that allows them to pursue the dark side while seeing it as the light.
Are you serious??? That would be an unconscionable thing to do since almost no one would pick up on that message. That seems like a ridiculously extreme reach in order to give someone the benefit of the doubt.
My guess is that almost everyone thought Saddam had “WMD’s” of some sort, and the Bush administration didn’t think they needed to do much of anything to prove it. OWell thought he had them, too, but didn’t have the resources or authority himself to do the actual research to pin down what was what. Bush’s plan was to just throw a bunch of stuff at the wall and see what sticks-- as long as something sticks, no one will worry about the stuff that didn’t. Except… well, we all know what happened after that.
I think he’s making some efforts to penance, or make an effort to undo some of the harm.
But he could wake up tomorrow, call…who? Tim Russert?..and blow the Bushiviks right out of the water. If he was duped, there is no reason he shouldn’t, in fact, he has a positive duty to do so. If he wasn’t duped, he has the same duty, but is less likely since, of course, he has something to hide.
So I fear his silence implies he was in on it. Which would mean only that people like me, who tend to confuse gravitas with virtue, are pretty fucking stupid, aren’t we?
I’m not following you on this. What exactly is the “it” that he was “in on”? And what that “it” is, isn’t it also possible that he wasn’t “in on it” at all, but just sloppy about how much he questioned the data since, afterall, everyone knew* SM had WMDs of some sort…?
*As I said above, almost everyone did think there were WMDs of some sort somewhere, but differed on how to deal with that “fact”.
Well, Powell was a media darling, and running up to the 2000 election when there was a push to get him on the Republican ticket either as the Pres. or VP candidate, the image presented to us quite persistently was practically of a modern-day Warrior Sage. I think we can forgive ourselves a little bit for being won over by the hype without forgetting our own responsibility too much. That he turned out to be a disappointingly conventional sort of warrior (i.e. loyal to command, perhaps to a tragic fault) maybe shouldn’t have been such a surprise, but we were primed to be surprised by nearly everyone who talked about him.
Perhaps technically true but largely irrelevant. By the time they started the war, I think the U.S. government officials had a pretty good idea that their intelligence was crap…and that Saddam probably didn’t really have nearly what they might have earlier suspected he did (see, e.g., this article). In fact, I sometimes wonder if the final rush to war was spurred partly by the realization that the longer the inspectors remained there, the more the Administration’s house-of-cards was crumbling around them. More evidence is provided by the fact that right from the get-go on the war, they were lowering the expectations for what constituted a “find” in terms of WMDs.
I agree with you that they probably expected that they could find something that they could trot out and use to justify their actions…but they knew that this was just B.S.