Jogging the president’s memory

One of the holiday weekend’s more notable revelations came by way of Robert Draper’s new book, “Dead Certain,” which is based on multiple conversations with the president and his team. Specifically, Draper spoke to Bush about the disastrous 2003 decision to disband the Iraqi Army, generally considered one of the administration’s more catastrophic errors.

Bush said, “The policy was to keep the army intact; didn’t happen.” Draper noted that the president’s man in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, forced the army’s dissolution. Asked how he responded to the decision, Bush said, “Yeah, I can’t remember, I’m sure I said, ‘This is the policy, what happened?'”

It’s a rather humiliating revelation. Bush comes across like a confused child — he didn’t understand the decision, he’s not sure how the decision was made, and asked for his reaction to the decision, Bush is left to conclude, “Yeah, I can’t remember.”

In effect, Bush is saying Bremer ignored administration policy and acted on his own. That seems rather hard to believe — why wasn’t Bremer replaced if that were true? — but it seems Bremer doesn’t want to be the fall-guy here. Yesterday, he gave the NYT a copy of a letter from 2003 in which he communicated with Bush directly about disbanding the Iraqi Army.

A previously undisclosed exchange of letters shows that President Bush was told in advance by his top Iraq envoy in May 2003 of a plan to “dissolve Saddam’s military and intelligence structures,” a plan that the envoy, L. Paul Bremer, said referred to dismantling the Iraqi Army. […]

“We must make it clear to everyone that we mean business: that Saddam and the Baathists are finished,” Mr. Bremer wrote in a letter that was drafted on May 20, 2003, and sent to the president on May 22 through Donald H. Rumsfeld, then secretary of defense.

After recounting American efforts to remove members of the Baath Party of Saddam Hussein from civilian agencies, Mr. Bremer told Mr. Bush that he would “parallel this step with an even more robust measure” to dismantle the Iraq military.

Bush received and responded to the letter, telling Bremer, “Your leadership is apparent.”

The exchange tells us a few things of interest.

First, if Bush was keeping up with Iraq policy and read Bremer’s letter, he was lying about his role in the mistake that helped create the Iraqi insurgency.

Second, if Bush never read Bremer’s note and was detached from policy decisions, major consequential transformations were underway in Iraq while the president had no idea what was going on, even when given information in print by his own administrator on the ground.

Mr. Bremer indicated that he had been smoldering for months as other administration officials had distanced themselves from his order. “This didn’t just pop out of my head,” he said in a telephone interview on Monday, adding that he had sent a draft of the order to top Pentagon officials and discussed it “several times” with Mr. Rumsfeld.

To be sure, this is hardly the first time the Bush gang can’t keep their stories straight about one of their colossal failures, but it’s another handy one for the list. It’s also a reminder in the midst of the current debate over the future of U.S. policy in Iraq — one side of the argument has no credibility.

Only 503 days to go.

Maybe Bush didn’t actually intend to invade Iraq, either.

  • I suspect the unseen hand of our Creepy Veep directed this policy. Viewed from his undisclosed alternate universe, disbanding Iraq’s Army would be seen as a positive step forward. What were they supposed to do anyway? Protect us from rose petals?

  • What it tells us is there was no advisor worthy of the name within Bush’s inner circle. Powell obviously was excluded. So Creepy Dick, and Rampaging Rover were in charge, and the Dim-Deserter totally clueless.

  • The Republican mind rejects all evidence that suggests fallibility. Whether Bush approved the order or signed off without understanding it is irrelevant. Bush was right back then, he’s right now and he’ll be right tomorrow. All else flows from that. Bremer, may have a different “recollection” but he’s mistaken. Still, he did a heckuva job and that’s why Bush gave him a medal of freedom. (The president “strongly disagrees” that the medal was given to keep Bremer quiet.)

  • He’s the Decider, dammit, not the Rememberer.

    When your decisions are informed by Jim Beam, Percocet and the word of G*d then you don’t need to remember them: they were all perfect.

  • I’ll bet Bush wishes he was old enough to employ the Reagan defense: “I’m old, I forget things.”

    That said…

    IMHO leaving the Baathists in charge probably would not have really worked. The key component to keeping a political lid on the Frankenstein that Britain built at the end of WWI was a strongman dictator. Without a real bastard at the top, the Shiites would eventually rise up and take their majority rights from the minority Sunnis by force, and we would have almost the exact same civil war we’re seeing now.

    The die was cast in 1921.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq#British_Mandate_of_Mesopotamia

  • (fake news from Sub-Rosa News)

    SUB-ROSA NEWS

    Some of the News
    That may be True

    BUSH RESCINDS ORDER TO DISBAND NAVY

    Sydney. September 4, 2007 – President Bush released a statement today saying that he had ordered the Secretary of the Navy to cease immediately all actions dismantling the U.S. Navy.

    During a brief press conference, Mr. Bush said that he had acted promptly after learning of the disbanding of the Navy. He added that has always been his policy to maintain the operations of the United States Navy. Fortunately, to date only one cruiser and two destroyers had been sold.

    In response to a reporter’s question noting the existence of President Bush’s executive order telling the Joint Chiefs’ to take this action, Mr. Bush said he did not remember such an order, adding that “Hadley has notes on that”.

    homer http://www.altara.blogspot.com

  • Reading the article, this really jumped out at me…

    Mr. Bush said he believed that Mr. Hussein did not take his threats of war seriously, suggesting that the United Nations emboldened him by failing to follow up on an initial resolution demanding that Iraq disarm. He had sought a second measure containing an ultimatum that failure to comply would result in war.

    “One interesting question historians are going to have to answer is: Would Saddam have behaved differently if he hadn’t gotten mixed signals between the first resolution and the failure of the second resolution?” Mr. Bush said. “I can’t answer that question. I was hopeful that diplomacy would work.”

    It did not

    Oh really? Diplomacy wasn’t working? Hussein wasn’t cooperating?

    According to who? In the reality-based world, we all know that the UN inspectors went over the whole place, and found NOTHING, when the US was providing them with all the “intelligence” we had, which of course was GARBAGE. Hussein wasn’t just rolling over and letting himself be castrated by letting foreign agents just waltz in and do what amounted to US recon work, but he obviously did not have the stuff Bush said he did, and more importantly the public was beginning to see the war’s potential downside in light of the news of ZERO WMDs being found. Public opinion was dipping below 50% and that’s why Bush had to kick out the inspectors and invade.

    Days before the March 20 invasion, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll found support for the war was related to UN approval. Nearly six in 10 said they were ready for such an invasion “in the next week or two.” But that support dropped off if the U.N. backing was not first obtained. If the U.N. Security Council were to reject a resolution paving the way for military action, only 54% of Americans favored a U.S. invasion. And if the Bush administration didn’t not seek a final Security Council vote, support for a war dropped to 47%.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_popular_opinion_on_invasion_of_Iraq#March_2003

    So what we have here is a major re-write of the real history of what really happened. Jim Rutenberg needs to do a little reading on the reasons why Bush invaded and what Hussein actually did with regards to the UN demands.

    Jesus Christ the NYT sucks ass sometimes. The proof is in the pudding:

    http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?general_topic_areas=publicOpinion&timeline=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq

    nearly two-thirds of those polled believe that UN weapons inspectors have “found proof that Iraq is trying to hide weapons of mass destruction” even though neither Hans Blix nor Mohamed ElBaradei have ever reported this. 57 percent believe that Saddam Hussein helped the 9/11 hijackers. [Editor & Publisher, 3/26/2003]

    And of course now we have a huge percentage of Americans thinking that Iran is building a bomb and that they will use it on us as soon as they get it. This of course is more garbage that the media leaves in the heads of the populace, paving the way for yet another disaster.

  • Third, why would our civilian leader be communicating with the President through the Department of Defense? No wonder postwar Iraq was so fucked up. How much of a worthless piece of whatever must Powell be to have put up with this for more than a year without resigning in protest and speaking out in every forum he could find?

  • It’s almost proverbial how the Republicans have this well-oiled, on-message machine which follows Reagan’s 11th Commandment to the letter. Of course, it’s easy to create that impression when your leader acts like a Oracle-Pope and routinely enforces his mindless edicts with witch hunts and anathemas and excommunications.

    Quite different with the Democrats who routinely doubt their own convictions, argue with each other like German theologians and Jesuits, question whether they should be “of the faith” (i.e.,like John Edwards, true to the memory of FDR) or tooting their own horn with tunes cranked out by focus groups, attempting above all to offend no one (even by oversight).

    But things balance out in the end. The Republicans, now and probably well past the Shrub’s exit, will show us some of what the Reformation and Counter-Reformation was like. Bloodbaths rights and left. Each of them excommunicating all the others with abandon. Tell-all books coming out from everyone while there’s still a buck to be made through book sales and speaking engagements.

    Now if only the Democrats could see this age the way our Founding Fathers saw the Age of Reason: a time to return to reason, hope and a good deal of constructive give-and-take. I know, it’ll never happen. They’ve forgotten what it was like before hillbillies called the tune, before political life became as shallow the the TeeVee screen and as memorable as last year’s TeeVee schedule.

  • The Iraqi army leaders even offered to help in Iraq’s reconstruction. To put their commands under American leadership and were refused.
    All the death that followed could have been prevented. For all those who lost family members in this fiasco this is the “leadership” that got them killed. Their deaths meant nothing to Bush who doesn’t even care to remember the biggest mistake he made that got them killed. How can you really believe this Man or his organization supports the troops when his decisions got them killed and he passes it off as if it were nothing. Oh well.

  • The Iraq war started with Cheney $30 million dollar retirement package (bribe) from the Halliburton Corp.

  • Comments are closed.