Comments: "Some Ritual Bloodletting"

Wag the dog. I'll be darned.

Posted by Donald Johnson at January 31, 2009 11:43 AM

And the impeachment effort looks even more destructively sleazy than it did at the time. Nice work, everyone involved: Bill Clinton, robotically defensive Democrats, howler monkey Republicans, trash-wallowing media. Heckuva job. The constitutional instrument of accountability now made useless for the rest of my life and probably forever, and a handy excuse for failures of political and moral courage for the whole sorry Clinton crowd.

Is this the first time that Duelfer has confirmed the spying? "Respectable" media reported it in 1999.

Posted by Nell at January 31, 2009 11:45 AM

If nothing else, they were missed opportunities for Washington to gain more knowledge.

Call me a cynic, but I don't think "more knowledge" was what Washington was looking for.

Posted by SteveB at January 31, 2009 12:13 PM

Was not December 1998 bombing operation called "Desert Fox"? "Desert Storm" was in 1991!

Posted by Rupa Shah at January 31, 2009 12:57 PM

Rupa, thanks. Of course you're right; fixed it.

Posted by Jonathan Schwarz at January 31, 2009 01:00 PM

Hmm, I don't recall ever seeing confirmation of spying by any official source before - I've always seen it as alleged on the part of the Saddam regime. But I also don't follow that closely...

Posted by saurabh at January 31, 2009 01:48 PM

I saw this in Borders over the weekend, flipped through it for the interesting (WMD) parts. From what I recall, he believes that the threat of Saddam getting WMDs was good rationale for the invasion. That's point 1 against him for bias for Rethugs.

If you check out Gen (ret) Tony Zinni's account of Desert Fox (he was CENTCOM commander), he will say that Clinton told him to hit WMD sites to send Saddam a message about letting the inspectors into the country. Zinni responded that there really were no known WMD sites, but there were "associated WMD" regime sites such as security, headquarters, etc etc. So those were bombed. That's point 2 against Duelfer's bias against the Dems.

I put the book back on the shelf. No plans to buy it unless it's on the remainders table for less than 10 bucks.

Posted by Jason at February 2, 2009 04:26 PM

I saw this in Borders over the weekend, flipped through it for the interesting (WMD) parts. From what I recall, he believes that the threat of Saddam getting WMDs was good rationale for the invasion. That's point 1 against him for bias for Rethugs.

If you check out Gen (ret) Tony Zinni's account of Desert Fox (he was CENTCOM commander), he will say that Clinton told him to hit WMD sites to send Saddam a message about letting the inspectors into the country. Zinni responded that there really were no known WMD sites, but there were "associated WMD" regime sites such as security, headquarters, etc etc. So those were bombed. That's point 2 for Duelfer's bias against the Dems.

I put the book back on the shelf. No plans to buy it unless it's on the remainders table for less than 10 bucks.

Posted by Jason at February 2, 2009 04:26 PM