When the news that we had not found the weapons we went to war over came out I thought well it’s early yet. As time went on with nothing turning up I considered that perhaps they were destroyed after all but as I have no way of knowing I kept no set opinion. So I sat, watched and listened and pondered. As more and more time elapsed and we came up empty handed I was amazed that we would supposedly allow our credibility to take such a hit. If nothing else one would suspect at least for us to plant some so we could justify ourselves. There is however something else that has had me thinking all this time. On the surface of it not finding the WMD is a set back in light of world opinion but the war party is Machiavellian enough to deny the weapons exist even if they did and even if they did find them in Iraq. Since the war ended I've heard murmuring along the lines that Saddam shipped those weapons to Syria or Lebanon. Now I am hearing this line a bit more loudly. Coming up empty handed in Iraq could be a set up. When the time is right we find “proof” those weapons are in Syria and Viola! the war party has cause belie for phase two of “democratizing” the ME and they restore face. So in the end it really doesn’t matter if the weapons ever existed or not, whether they were destroyed or not as they can any ways and all ways be reason to further the agenda. If I were a betting man I might wager on this.
When the news that we had not found the weapons we went to war over came out I thought well it’s early yet.
First, JohnGalt has not been using facts, and he cannot account for those that I throw at him. Secondly, if you can find evidence that we went to war over WMD, contact Howard Dean's campaign staff or John Kerry's, they would really like something besides hollow rhetoric with which to attack our president.
Have you read the congressional resolution authorizing war? Among the several reasons listed for the invasion of Iraq, the "capacity to possess" (not actual present-time possession) was one of those listed. Did you bother listening to President Bush et al when they addressed the U.N. and other organizations? They cited stockpiles of WMD that Iraq admitted to possessing at the end of the first Gulf War, but could not account for since. U.S. officials also discussed facilities that were previously used for WMD production, and had since re-opened for undisclosed purposes. We could only safely assume they were being used for the same purpose.
Have you ever wondered why Iraq's scientists were working with strains of Brucella, ricin, Congo Crimean Hemmhoragic Fever, and other diseases, along with ballistic missile and UAV programs?
Fortunately, we have a mature president who recognizes a threat when he sees one and is willing to do something about it. If we had someone like you or John Kerry in the White House, my children's future would be much more cloudy. With your lack of knowledge on this subject, perhaps you should stay on the sidelines more.
I think the WMDead Enders are an example of the crisis in masculinity.
War mongers in the past like say Rudyard Kipling were still masculine individuals who boldly declared that Empire was a worthy cause to die for. These people are like policy wonks, boring you to sleep with tales that would not scare a 10 year old, let alone understand what the hell the person is babbling about.
Thus the absence of the WMDs will be handled in stride by Mainstream Rightists as an intelligence and political failure that requires a remedy (resignations, dismissals), however, the Dead Enders will keep digging their own graves, unable to deal with the shame of being duped.