Kerry Committee POW/MIA

[sandnsea]

In thinking of Kerry being the ______ candidate. I ran across this, links to the Executive Summary, and Chapter 4 on Intelligence. I haven't read it all, but it looks interesting.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/2004/10/103004.html

I'm looking for either a hearing or an interview back in 2002 where Kerry questions someone, or is talking to someone, about whether the WMD intelligence is correct. IIRC, he mentions speaking to leaders in the region who are warning that Saddam and his WMD are being hyped. I think it would prove that the intelligence always was at issue and many people knew it was at issue. To gobble it down, the way Edwards says he did, is beyond comprehension. If I could find this, it would show that Kerry was questioning all along, and voted for the IWR in order to answer those questions once and for all. Inspections was his goal, not war.

If Edwards believed Saddam had WMD, then the question to him becomes, why isn't he getting to the bottom of this massive intelligence failure. Everybody else can see Bush distorted it, most Americans believe that. Why doesn't Edwards? Is it because he realizes he helped? I don't know, but I'm not liking this latest attack on 'being misled'. We were lied into a war and if Edwards doesn't get that, then he doesn't get anything.

[karynnj]

1. Trying to figure out what Edwards is doing makes my head hurt

His position here is that he thought there were WMD, but Bush didn't lie - that was the information they all had in October 2002. He says he spoke to the intelligence agencies and the Clinton information and they were in sgreement. This is the Cheney / Limbaugh et al view. (The odd thing is that this almost is defending the vote he rejected). He also is ignoring that the war was 6 months later.

The only sense I can make of this is that this is not an attack on Kerry, but on the Clintons. He is saying specificly that Clinton administration people said the same thing. (There may be truth to this remembering Will Pitt account of Kerry at Al Franken's appartment. That there were Democrats he trusted who tell him the same thing). Bill Clinton last September said all of the Democrats (except Lieberman) voted based on Bush lies. From Bill Clinton, that could be seen as political.

As to Kerry's "misleading us into war", Kerry was giving Bush the benefit of the doubt on the intelligence given in 2002 when he repeatedly said that. The "mislead" was based on the fact that in March 2003, Bush didn't let the inspectors finish their work, exhaust the diplomacy, or have a plan to win the peace. (note- all these are the conditions Kerry listed to define why Iraq was not a just war.) The intelligence of October 2002, was irrelevent to Bush's March 2003 decision - in the meanwhile the inspectors had greatly updated the intelligence. (Kerry's words were repeated millions of times and the same litany was always included - in nearly the same words.) Kerry would not have taken us to war in 2003.

With the DSM, the weight that Bush never believed it became strong enough that Kerry was willing to say that the President lied. It was clear then that Bush betrayed them in both Oct 2002, when they made a case they knew was not true (In 2003, it was clear there were lies, but it was possible that they lied to make a case they believed in) and in March 2003 when he didn't keep his promises on the conditions under whhich he would take the country to war.

I don't see how this helps Edwards against Obama, Gore or Kerry because:

- he did NOTHING when the inspectors were in, finding nothing and destroying missiles. This would be the point where it was clear that the nformation he had from everyone was suspect. He was still a cheerleader.

and even

- in October 2003, months into the war when it was first clear there were no WMD, on Hardball his position was that he never believed there were WMD, but thought there were other reasons to stop Saddam. Ignoring whether the intelligence was distorted, this is a direct contradiction to this comment - on HIS OWN BELIEFS.

What he is doing is setting himself up for a very embarrassing MTP, Hardball or some other show. All I can say is that I do not envy an Edwards person trying to support him on this - this is not flip-flopping, it is re-writing history. I don't see how he reconciles this. As a bonus, the Hardball interview (which the Clarkies keeps posting)also contradicts his apology. The truth is that he, for at least a year, seemed to have bought the PNAC logic.