Why Not Admit When You're Misled?

Let me firstly explain, that I agree with the war in Iraq. I agree when the president says he'd believe our CIA and foreign intelligence over the Sadam.

What I don't understand, though, is why it took so long for the president to come out and say that he was misled by faulty intelligence information, and that there wasn't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

That fact doesn't take away from two main points: the faulty information wasn't W.'s fault, and the war is still justified.

As a president, s/he is the manager of the federal government. As with all managers, he needs to delegate most of the work in his job. It is obviously impossible for the president or any leader to have his hands on all aspects of the job. As a manager myself, I make decisions every day based on information that I get from others. As time goes on, you learn who's information is more reliable then others.

As president, he was given information from several sources both domestic and foreign that Iraq had WMD. Not to mention all the human rights violations that were known from the first desert storm. George W., took the information at his disposal and made the correct decision, as did a vast majority of congress and the population. Funny, how quickly we forget how congress voted to give the president the power to go to war, but that's another post.

The point is, everyone makes mistakes, and it builds respect and credibility to admit it, to explain to the American People what happened. You have to believe in people and thier ability to understand complicated issues. It took the president years to finally admit the intelligence was wrong, and that decreases his credibility in my eyes.