The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq's pursuit. We acted because we saw the evidence in a dramatic new light - through the prism of our experience on 9/11.

If in doubt, move decisions up to the President.

Be precise. A lack of precision is dangerous when the margin of error is small.

I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.

There's another way to phrase that and that is that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. It is basically saying the same thing in a different way. Simply because you do not have evidence that something does exist does not mean that you have evidence that it doesn't exist.

NATO member states vary dramatically in their capability and in their political steadfastness.

If the staff lacks policy guidance against which to test decisions, their decisions will be random.