Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
(edit)
My view is that they were painted into a corner, and simply had no other means of getting out without divulging the most up to date information to silence the partisan critics. I'll be happy to entertain other views though. If you can give me a plausible scenario that would have silenced those claiming the terror alerts were political but did not expose who gave us this latest information, I'll be happy to consider it.
Also please don't say that Bush could have just ignored the critics. When people begin not taking the alerts seriously or doubting their intent, it puts us in harms way. It creates the same sort of casual attitude that helped 9/11 to happen. (Box cutters, who cares about box cutters)
Nick
(edit)
My view is that they were painted into a corner, and simply had no other means of getting out without divulging the most up to date information to silence the partisan critics. I'll be happy to entertain other views though. If you can give me a plausible scenario that would have silenced those claiming the terror alerts were political but did not expose who gave us this latest information, I'll be happy to consider it.
Also please don't say that Bush could have just ignored the critics. When people begin not taking the alerts seriously or doubting their intent, it puts us in harms way. It creates the same sort of casual attitude that helped 9/11 to happen. (Box cutters, who cares about box cutters)
Nick
This is kinda a bizarre line of reasoning.
You're saying that the Bush admin, which heretofore has not given a rat's ass about its "partisan critics", was somehow was forced to give up a valuable asset in order to "silence" same.
And this is not playing politics with terror, because the fact that people have grown cynical about terror alerts obliges the white house to start providing proof of why the alerts are for real.
You sure you want this to be you argument?
Because the idea that those pesky lefties are forcing the presidents hand is silly. As if all the shouting and gnashing of teeth so far has had any effect whatsoever on policy. And if it were true, it would mean the white house is more interested in "silencing partisan critics" than preserving national security.
A problem you try to avoid by claiming that it has now become necessary to provide sourcing for terror alerts because the nation isn't taking them seriously any more.
Which confirms what many of us have been strenuously arguing, that the bush penchant for devaluing terror alerts by issuing them for what appears to be political expediency has a corrosive effect on our actual preparedness.
On the other hand, if true, it means that from here on out we can expect intel to be compromised for the sake of "coming off as not lying".
And yes, I can bloody well expect Bush to not abuse the so called WOT for political reasons at the same time I fault him for blowing the cover of a useful insider. Claiming that this is some kind of hypocritical "they're never satisfied" thing is disingenuous at best.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
