Bad Premises for War

Some say Iraq intelligence debate oversimplified
Policy analysts want to talk about whether the U.S. should have gone to war in 2003
By MICHAEL HEDGES
Nov. 19, 2005
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

"Two extensive, bipartisan investigations have examined the matter: one by the Senate Intelligence Committee and another by a commission headed by former Democratic Sen. Chuck Robb and federal appellate Judge Laurence Silberman.
Both panels found that prewar intelligence was badly flawed. The panels also agreed that the White House did not induce the errors. But with the war's popularity plummeting, the debate has taken on a sharper edge, with lack of nuance and human error taking a back seat to charges of lying and cooking up evidence. "The Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit anyone who dared to challenge the president," Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid said last week. Republicans have responded by calling Democrats hypocrites because many of them supported the war: The Iraq resolution passed the Senate,77-23, with 29 of 50 Democrats voting with the majority, and 296-133 in the House, with 81 Democrats voting in favor. Rep. Gene Green of Houston, a Texas Democrat who voted for the Iraq war resolution, said he met with then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and then-CIA Director George Tenet during congressional meetings with the White House. The lawmakers were shown pictures of installations in Iraq that were described as weapons-of-mass-destruction facilities. "I think they made the case showing it was WMD. Misled is a pretty harsh word, but I feel like the administration set out to have a war. I gave them the benefit of the doubt," he said. "In hindsight, I wouldn't have. With the information I had then, I don't regret it," Green added. "But with the information I have now, I wouldn't vote for it.""