Paul Craig Roberts gets it
Roberts is a conservative who used to write for the Washington Times (I don't see him there at the Moonie Times anymore--the Times is owned by Rev. Sun-Yung Moon, a long-time Reagan and Bush supporter). Here is Roberts' take on what I think is Richard Clarke's most damaging assertion: That what the Bushies have done since 9/11, particularly in Iraq, has made us LESS safe.
From Roberts' latest column on lewrockwell.com:
There are no excuses for the invasion of Iraq. Intelligence failures notwithstanding, terrorist attacks are surprises by definition, but we knew beforehand that Iraq had nothing to do with 911.
...
Prior to the US invasion on March 19, 2003, Iraq was not a major problem for the US. One year later, it is. The occupation strains our military and budget. The US seeks to install a puppet regime, but the majority Shi’ites are having none of it. Will civil war and the breakup of the country come next?
...
Stung by criticisms that the invasion of Iraq has undermined the war on terrorism, the Bush administration has pressured its Pakistani puppet to risk the stability of his own rule by sending his army into tribal areas in search of bin Laden.
The Pew poll found that 65% of Pakistanis have a positive view of Osama bin Laden, but only 7% have a positive view of President Bush. A symbolic capture of bin Laden that resulted in the overthrow of the US puppet, Musharraf, would be a bad bargain.
...
The invasion of Iraq is a far greater intelligence failure than 911. The mistake is too great to be acknowledged. Denial will rule while unintended consequences play out to America’s disadvantage.
The question for the 911 Commission is not whether the Clinton administration missed chances to assassinate bin Laden or whether the Bush administration’s loose immigration controls and interagency communication failures ensured the terrorists’ success. The only question is: why does the US persist with a foreign policy that breeds terrorism?
The challenge for the US is to break free from the folly and arrogance that power begets.
Conservatives like Roberts and Pat Buchanan get it:
Why can't John Kerry get it too?
Roberts is a conservative who used to write for the Washington Times (I don't see him there at the Moonie Times anymore--the Times is owned by Rev. Sun-Yung Moon, a long-time Reagan and Bush supporter). Here is Roberts' take on what I think is Richard Clarke's most damaging assertion: That what the Bushies have done since 9/11, particularly in Iraq, has made us LESS safe.
From Roberts' latest column on lewrockwell.com:
There are no excuses for the invasion of Iraq. Intelligence failures notwithstanding, terrorist attacks are surprises by definition, but we knew beforehand that Iraq had nothing to do with 911.
...
Prior to the US invasion on March 19, 2003, Iraq was not a major problem for the US. One year later, it is. The occupation strains our military and budget. The US seeks to install a puppet regime, but the majority Shi’ites are having none of it. Will civil war and the breakup of the country come next?
...
Stung by criticisms that the invasion of Iraq has undermined the war on terrorism, the Bush administration has pressured its Pakistani puppet to risk the stability of his own rule by sending his army into tribal areas in search of bin Laden.
The Pew poll found that 65% of Pakistanis have a positive view of Osama bin Laden, but only 7% have a positive view of President Bush. A symbolic capture of bin Laden that resulted in the overthrow of the US puppet, Musharraf, would be a bad bargain.
...
The invasion of Iraq is a far greater intelligence failure than 911. The mistake is too great to be acknowledged. Denial will rule while unintended consequences play out to America’s disadvantage.
The question for the 911 Commission is not whether the Clinton administration missed chances to assassinate bin Laden or whether the Bush administration’s loose immigration controls and interagency communication failures ensured the terrorists’ success. The only question is: why does the US persist with a foreign policy that breeds terrorism?
The challenge for the US is to break free from the folly and arrogance that power begets.
Conservatives like Roberts and Pat Buchanan get it:
Why does the US persist with a foreign policy that breeds terrorism?
Why can't John Kerry get it too?
<< Home