As I say, I would be open to genuine evidence on this as opposed to speculation. But his dad said nothing about this; nor did Nichols. Only this one letter.
I don't know why this one time soldier AGAINST Iraq would pen the following, but he did:
The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons ("weapons of mass destruction") - mainly because they have used them in the past. Well, if that's the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.S. is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims that this was done for deterrent purposes during its "Cold War" with the Soviet Union. Why, then, is it invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterrence) - with respect to Iraq's (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?
Moreover, it means that he lied when he wrote about the hatred of "big government" as his reason for OK City.
I don't think he needed to lie when he said he hated "big government". I don't think his hatred and that of Iraq's hatred were mutually exclusive. In fact, it makes sense that he would ally himself with fellow anti-U.S. terrorists.