War and Piece discusses the new Wall Street Journal coverage of the White House's failure to approve an attack on Zarqawi when he was in Northern (non-Saddam controlled) Iraq in 2002. Gen. John Keane, Vice Chief of Staff of the Army at the time, described the camp where Zarqawi was located as "one of the best targets we ever had". But that strong, decisive, action-oriented Bush White House refused to approve plans to attack the terrorist training camp.
Posted by armand at October 25, 2004 01:00 PM | TrackBack | Posted to PoliticsI thought this was an even more surprising post. I mean, I expect news that the Bush administration fell down on the job. The news that the American Conservative published a piece endorsing Kerry was a surprise.
Posted by: binky at October 25, 2004 02:07 PM | PERMALINKisn't it a little misleading to omit to mention that, in fact, AmCon published 7 endorsements in lieu of an editorial endorsement, one of which was an injunction not to vote at all, and the winner of a plurality of which (a whopping two votes) was petrouka? i prefer your wording to that of war and piece (which says the "magazine" endorses kerry), but still, let's call it like it is. anyway, who wants AmCon's endorsement? ;-)
Posted by: joshua at October 25, 2004 02:34 PM | PERMALINKPrecisely why I chose the words I did. I just thought it interesting that they published it at all.
However, AmCon had to know that even publishing one of seven as a pro-Kerry (or at least, anti-Bush) statement would be widely picked up. Knowing it (which they had to have), and going ahead with it (which they did), means that they intended to send a loud signal. So, even though it wasn't a full endorsement, it was at least a stinging slap to Bush.
Posted by: binky at October 25, 2004 03:47 PM | PERMALINK