Politics As Usual

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Strong words from someone who keeps extolling the importance of the fact that the rest of the world thought Hussein had WMD. I guess what they thought isn't important only if they disagreed with us.

I don't mean that his beliefs as to whether there were WMD was speculative. I mean that, because it is an intelligence, by nature it is not capable of factual certainty. Neither was our intelligence or the rest of the world's. What was told to the US, on the other hand, is.

When did you become so desperate to grasp at these straws? WMD and Al Qaeda are dead as justifications for war. All that's left is the covering action as the administration retreats, and the humanitarian/democracy rationale.

Or do you think that what we've learned since the war ended leads to the conclusion that war was justified to protect ourselves from WMD and to combat Al Qaeda (swamp-draining aside)? And I don't mean, did Bush act reasonably? I mean, if you knew then what you know now about WMD and Iraq's connections to Al Qaeda, would that have warranted war, other rationales aside?

I don't agree with your first paragraph, but that's a tired subject. As for the question in your second, yes I do believe it warranted war. The swamp draining is a side benefit. IMHO, as a long term strategy against jihad, we need to remake the ME, and it aint going to happen through diplomacy.