The people who make the argument you do lack not only credibility, but logic. Do folks with your point of view contend that for 12 long years Saddam Hussein was calling some kind of insane bluff? That he never had WMD, but nevertheless allowed his power to be curbed by:
- Constant UN inspections — indeed, that he spent those years pretending to obstruct inspections and hide stuff he didn't have?
- Near daily bombings by the U.S. and Britain?
- The inabiltiy to exert free, sovereign control of not only Iraq's airspace, commerce, and its chief source of income, oil?
Hussein did all this for so long, why? When he threw the inspectors out in 1998, he did so why? In the 14-month build-up to the war earlier this year, Hussein had every opportunity to save his power (and possibly his life) by throwing open the country to UN inspections and cooperate fully. But he did not. Why, if he had no WMD? The truth is Hussein's actions only make sense in the context of his having something he desperately wanted to hide.
The truth also is that the international Left is trying to discredit the entirely justifiable overthrow of one of (if not the) most vicious, heinous, dangerous dictators in the post-WWII period.
Wold, I agree with everything you said. But I also agree with everything I said. They are not mutually inconsistent.
The admin stuck its neck out. They must be right, or will suffer a terrible credibility loss.
That's the truth.