perfidy

Steven den Beste has a lengthy (even by his standards) discussion of the whole iraq invasion thingie. (Thingie! Thingie!) It sums up, no it explains in great detail most of what I think about the subject. That sounds pathetic, but it is convenient having someone like Clueless around - as he has vastly more time available than I do, and can write these articles while I am reduced to saying, "Yeah, what he said!" 

Despite Clueless' exhaustive treatment of the subject, I do have some comments.

If we are not complaining about the sixteen words in particular, but are saying that this is indicative of a larger misdirection-spin-maybe even lying pattern on the part of the Bush administration, there are certainly arguments that can be made.

But the reason that all of the rhetoric coming out of the Bush administration back before the livervasion centered on WMD is simple - because the diplomatic battles were being fought in and around the UN. I remember the administration saying that WMD was not the only reason to invade. I also remember that they were discussing WMD as a direct result of the decision to go to the UN for a resolution, and then a second.

Even from the bully pulpit, there is a limit to how much you can address. Given the international political situation (the domestic was never much of an issue - Congress had signed off months before) it is understandable that much of what they were saying was all about WMD. And they were trying to make the most persuasive case that they could.

I also remember that there was little if any debate over the fact that Saddam had WMD - those who were against intervention were saying that inspections could solve the problem - but they agreed that it was a problem. And Saddam was in clear violation of countless UN resolutions.

I never thought that going to the UN was a good idea, and one of the reasons was that we would end up here, having this argument. This is a war on terror, not on Iraq, or on Al Qaeda in particular. This is one part of it. And one reason we are there is because Iraq is low hanging fruit.

It is indeed a mystery where the WMD went, because we know for a fact that Iraq had them as recently as five years ago. But this was never the primary issue. It was merely the most convenient reason to focus on, of many. So, this doesn't bother me because I never thought it was the primary reason. (Although, it definitely was a reason.)

Moving on to some other issues, we have gotten terrorists in Iraq, and closed terror training camps. Most of this related more to the Palestinian terrorists than Al Qaeda, but that is not an issue - terrorism is terrorism. The ultimate fate of the WMD is important, and I think we'll eventually figure it out.

Heads should start rolling in the intelligence community. More on that later. We don't have enough troops, and more on that later. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are still allies, but look how Pakistan has altered its behavior for the better. I think some have hoped that the Saudis would do the same, but I think that given their internal politics that is unlikely. I fervently hope that the day of reckoning for those bastards is near.