Insomnia (insomnia) wrote,

The buck stops elsewhere, apparently.

The other day, Dubya blamed Iraq's post-invasion instability and violence on Saddam Hussein. Nevermind that Saddam was captured in Dec. 2003, 28 months ago. This was pretty typical and sad, but not really anything new for him.

Well, today the blame game got worse, when Condoleeza Rice said the following:

"Yes, I know we have made tactical errors, thousands of them. I believe strongly that it was the right strategic decision, that Saddam had been a threat to the international community long enough."

This, incidentally, was the same Condoleeza Rice who said this about Saddam Hussein on July 29th, 2001:

"Let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

So, she's admitting that the US made thousands of "tactical errors", but no strategic (i.e. presidential) errors, even as she tries to justify an invasion she once described as an "urgent threat"... even though she obviously didn't really believe that Iraq was any great threat at all?

Thousands of "tactical mistakes", eh? Who should be held responsible for this? Now, obviously she doesn't want to blame anyone the president appointed, such as Rumsfeld, Bremer, etc. And the US occupation in Iraq has primarily been under the control of the Department of Defense, after Rumsfeld threw out / took over extensive post-invasion planning initiatives from the State Department...

So, how is this not blaming the soldiers?!

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.