- #1
RageSk8
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031027fa_fact [Broken]
Read it, seriously.
Read it, seriously.
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe this was intentional, to allow 'plausible deniability'?
I dunno...but then again, it works just as well, based on what we know of these folks...the main lie was the one they told themselves?Originally posted by RageSk8
I doubt the Bush Administration is so sinister. I always found, and debated against, the view that the Bush and Blaire administrations concocted lies to defend their stance on Iraq - I found it, and still find it, incomprehensible (and this article reaffirms my stance). They simply heard what they wanted to hear.
the main lie was the one they told themselves?
Thanks RageSk8,Originally posted by RageSk8
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031027fa_fact [Broken]
Read it, seriously.
The main focus of the article is to highlight the failures of the Bush administration in regards to intelligence gathering and decision making.
The article provides various examples and reports from government agencies and officials, as well as testimonies from experts and insiders, to support its claims of failures in intelligence.
According to the article, these failures in intelligence had major consequences for the country, including the invasion of Iraq based on false information and the mishandling of the response to Hurricane Katrina.
Yes, the article suggests that the failures in intelligence could have been avoided or minimized if the administration had listened to dissenting opinions and properly assessed the information being presented to them.
While the article may have a particular viewpoint, it presents its arguments and evidence in a factual and objective manner, allowing readers to form their own opinions on the subject.