Monday, January 26, 2004

One question, given that David Kay has said that he found no evidence, much less stockpiles, of WMD, does this mean Bush lied? I don't think so, but it does skewer the logic of the Bush haters who say he "conspired" and "lied" about the threat. How so? Well, if Bush is so evil, so conspiratorial with all of his "Imperial" power, don't you think he would have been sure that we would have found WMD ? Also, it wasn't only the US intelligence agencies that missed this one, apparently a whole bunch of others, including many in the UN missed also missed it. It's also important to restate, even if he didn't have WMD, why didn't Saddam say so? Spare me the "saving face" argument or the theory that he was hoodwinked by his own scientists. It was up to him to come clean, not up to the UN to prove he had none. This doesn't mean I excuse the obvious problems that appear to exist within the CIA. They need to be fixed. The President and his Administration should come forward and say so. On the other had, there can be no doubt that without pressure from the US and the UN "inspection regime," Saddam would have restared his WMD programs in a heartbeat. The war was justified. Iraq is and will be a better place for the average Iraqi now. Patience and persistance will prevail.

No comments: