Lies and War

After reading the last case study on the Iraq war, I was really struck by a different viewpoint than I have had since the beginning of this absurd war. The article really seemed to let President Bush off the hook in a way. It seemed to me from the reading that it really was not his failure to retract the statements made in the State of the Union address. Bush as many other presidents, I assume, do very little speech writing for themselves. It seemed to me that the failure came from his administration. This brings up a new set of questions in my mind. How much control does a President need to have to make sure failures like this do not happen? Bush clearly took a more casual role in his presidency or at least that is what I have read and heard from different sources. He treated the job like a typical 9 to 5 job according to some analysts. So does this fact alone cause him to take the blame for the faulty information or was he just a mouth piece to the nation?

These questions have been troubling me for a long time now and this class has only enhanced my questions. I have struggled to want to place blame on Bush just because of my feelings about him but is that justified or is there a bigger picture question here? I'm really starting to truly understand Thompson's argument about collective responsibility because it is clear in the Iraq war case more than just Bush is to blame here.

I understand that there are times that lies may or even need to occur in our government especially during a national crisis or war. The problem comes when it starts to cost lives. I don't believe that anyone would argue that Saddam was good guy and leader, but does the fact that he was bad some how justify the lies the Bush administration force feed the nation? I don't believe so. Going to war takes so much effort and resources and engaging in one under false pretenses creates a disturbing precedent that I hope will never occur again.