Reply With Quote
At the time I was against going into Iraq, I thought it could only result in Iraq in a giant mess and also with Iran becoming much more powerful and dangerous.
That said your paraphrasing leave something to be desired.
You imply that they purposely lied and mislead, and he not only went along with but continued that lie all this years until now retired.I ask him if it had been a mistake to invade Iraq in the first place.
His answer again comes without hesitation.
"In retrospect, it probably was," he says.
Once more, he follows with the kind of analysis only he could give. He acknowledges the people who advocated going to war with Iraq — he among them — did so because they thought there were weapons of mass destruction. But it turned out there were no weapons, which made the war a quest in a search of a shadow of a phantom.
In other words, a mistake.
I view his comments as a man with the benefit of hindsight admitting it was a mistake but done at the time with the motive of having believed there were weapons of mass destruction.
Why do so many people on both sides of political views so often try and twist things to make people look worse. The guy is admitting that now "In retrospect, it probably was," and really nothing more.
Originally Posted by Moveon
