Some administration critics believe Operation Iraqi Freedom was strictly about weapons of mass destruction. The reality is that Saddam Hussein's WMD programs were only one reason for the liberation of Iraq. We went to war for several reasons"
Perhaps the most interesting new twist in the evolution of the "revision" is contained in an article by Jonah Goldberg (editor of National Review Online and a contributing editor to the print version of National Review) in which he compares FDR, and his role in WWII, to the current debate. One paragraph stands out for its opening of a new avenue for argument. Goldberg states:
The Bush Doctrine is not chiefly about WMD and never was. Like FDR's vision, it balances democracy, security and morality. Still, the media and anti-Bush partisans have been bizarrely unmoved by the revelations of Hussein's killing fields, his torture chambers for tots, and democracy's tangible progress in the Middle East.
With a few pixels and strokes of a pen, he takes the argument away from the reason for going into Iraq and transfers it into the general "Bush Doctrine". He also compares the "Doctrine" to FDR's vision (notwithstanding the fact that George bush had repudiated FDR's "visions" as far back as Bush's days at Harvard). The argument is interesting- as a distraction from the main point. Nonetheless it is there and is sure to be repeated.
In am interview on "This Week" (November 20, 2005) Rumsfeld directly repudiates his statement in 2004 and contradicts the testimony given by Generals to the Senate. On troop levels he says, in part:
Rumsfeld: ... "The Iraqi Security Forces are now up to 212,000... They are engaged in the fight... They've got over 100 battalions that are functioning in one way or another".
He was asked by Stephanapolous about the number of 700 Iraqi troops being reported as ready with 20,000 that can lead but that need to be heavily supported.
Rumsfeld: "Most of our forces need support... the comparison you're casting is clearly confusing to the listener... The argument is...is... the U.S. has a plan. They have a strategy. They are implementing that. They have trained over 212,000 Iraqi Security Forces".
Rumsfeld goes on to say:
"... We currently have about 159,000 troops in Iraq. We plan to bring that down to 137,000- 138,000 after the election which has been our baseline."
That should be compared to what he said in 2003 (above) and what the Generals said to the Senate 1 month prior to this interview (below).
Rumsfeld goes on to explain his opinion and position on the war (in direct opposition to his 2004 statement).
Stephanopolous: If you had known that no WMD's would be found, would you still advocate invasion?
Rumsfeld: I didn't advocate invasion.
Stephanopolous: You didn't?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
