Iraq Revisited
On the eve of elections in Iraq, the success of which are in question, I would like to quickly re-visit the decision to invade. Most of what I hear from the opposition now is that we found no WMD and, therefore, Bush lied to us and the decision was totally without merit.
Barbara Boxer tried to say as much in the confirmation hearings for Condoleezza Rice:
However, even on the subject of WMD I believe the opposition has little to stand on. The vaunted sanctions were eroding, and the oil-for-food scandal is showing how worthless they were while in effect. And though no stockpiles were found, it is clear that Hussein was still pursuing WMD.
So "Bush lied" is absolute BS, Hussein's WMD programs were soon to be back in business, and the mass graves showed the scale of the humanitarian crisis.
I'm beginning to believe that the opposition's reasoning may be political in nature. Just a thought.
Barbara Boxer tried to say as much in the confirmation hearings for Condoleezza Rice:
Well, you should read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not, but most of my colleagues did. It was WMD, period. That was the reason and the causation for that, you know, particular vote.Well, you know, uh, no. I believe that the resolution, approved by the House 296-133 and the Senate 77-23, (full text of which is here, and worth the read) lays out very well the reasons for the action. Only part of which was WMD.
However, even on the subject of WMD I believe the opposition has little to stand on. The vaunted sanctions were eroding, and the oil-for-food scandal is showing how worthless they were while in effect. And though no stockpiles were found, it is clear that Hussein was still pursuing WMD.
So "Bush lied" is absolute BS, Hussein's WMD programs were soon to be back in business, and the mass graves showed the scale of the humanitarian crisis.
I'm beginning to believe that the opposition's reasoning may be political in nature. Just a thought.
posted by The Man at 7:55 AM
2 Comments:
When you make a decision to go to war, your best argument is to succeed. Now blog about the success in Iraq.
Surely you are not saying, as John Kerry did, that our success will determine whether or not it was the right decision. As for successes, I would point to the fact that Iraq is no longer a threat, perceived or otherwise, the fact that Hussein's sons are dead and he himself will soon be on trial, that sovereignty was returned as scheduled, and, it appears, the elections as well. Were these not the goals at the outset?
Post a Comment
<< Home