US officially gives up looking for WMD in Iraq

[Davros]

What I find difficult to reconcile (when I consider the matter of was Bush acting responsibly or appropriately) is Colin's little show and tell at the UN.

That was the presentation to the world of the "smoking gun". The fact is that so many in the world looked at what Colin had to say and said "I'm unconvinced". Back then (if you check the old posts), I was all gung-ho for stopping Saddam thumbing his nose at the world. I and many others were convinced of the existance of WOMD. For me, the doubting started with Colin's little slide show.

People back then on Ray's old "Where's our apology" thread defended the presentation on the basis that that would not be all the intel that was available - they would be keeping things up their sleeves. That calmed a few nerves back then, but it turns out that Colin's slideshaw WAS all the evidence.

Now for the kicker :

If so many people in the world could look at Colin's show and tell (and that includes people that opposed and people that were on board), and so many people could shake their heads and start doubting - why was not the President of the USA amongst those people. Why could he look at the same stuff that we saw from ole Colin and be so sure, yet so many people have doubts. The "he knew other stuff as well" theory seems to be shot full of holes now.

It seems to come down pretty much to 3 branches of options. He took the troops to war because :
a) He read the data in that presentation differently than the rest of us did, and he got it wrong.
b) He never looked at the evidence at all - he trusted completely in advisers and they were the ones that got it so wrong.
(Note - in this case I still think there needs to be more personal responsibility on the part of the President for cross questioning and checking before commiting US soldiers to die. Did the Kennedy's just take advice and blow the Cuban missiles to hell? Should any President in blissful ignorance commit the nation to war on only the recommendation of an intel report? Do leaders have a base level responsibility of cross questioning and checking and getting it right before sending the troops? Either this didn't happen (in which case GW failed his responsibility to the people) or it was not rigorous and was bungled)
or,
c) It didn;t really matter what the evidence said at all - there was an agenda and the agenda had to be pursued.

I think it was something of each, but no one seriously refuses to believe that GW didn't have a clear and singular focus from day 1 in office. Single minded focus is a great way of getting results - it got Saddam.

It doesn't always get the best result though, and there are more than a few grieving families who would agree with that.