When Charlie Gibson interviewed George W. Bush recently, we got to hear him say what we’ve all known for quite a while but which we never thought he’d admit; George W. Bush was unprepared for war. The admirably sensible statement was somewhat negated by his next statement in which he talked circles around himself trying to account for the obvious disparity between his statements about the impropriety of military action for the purpose of nation-building and the Iraq War.

The conversation is as follows:

GIBSON: What were you most unprepared for?

BUSH: Well, I think I was unprepared for war. In other words, I didn't campaign and say, "Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack." In other words, I didn't anticipate war. Presidents -- one of the things about the modern presidency is that the unexpected will happen.

GIBSON: You said you were not going to be in the business of nation-building. And so much of what you had to do was nation-building.

BUSH: Well, what I said was, in the course of a debate, I said the military shouldn't be used to build nations. In this case, it turns out the military, in my judgment, was needed to remove threats to our security, and after that removal, the military, as well as our diplomatic corps, needed to help rebuild after tyrannical situations.

It’s as though every time Bush enters into the vicinity of vindication, every time he begins to be honest about his failures, he remembers his cryogenic delusional pride and then must deny responsibility or misconduct. Of course no president can ever really be prepared for war, but he or she may be prepared to engage in earnest public dialogue.