|
"Right around when it was getting clear there were no WMDs, we caught Saddam, and that turned out to have been the real reason to go in there in the first place. Then when that didn't stop insurgent activity, the rationale shifted to "Regime change" and "spreading Freedom and Democracy".
I think the thing to notice is this: You acknowledge that it took 10 monthts ("Right around the time that it was getting clear") that WMD weren't in Iraq. I never needed WMD physically being found to justify going in there. The fact is that we had to go in there to make it clear, as you just pointed out. I've said this before, but I remember specifically President Bush saying "It's not up to us to prove he has WMD, it's up to him to prove he doesn't." He's had them, he's used them, and for 10 years he dicked with weapons inspectors. This was obviously never a good enough reason for the left, so why not throw out some of the other million and one reasons that justify this war, IMO.
And we're still bickering about weapons that were finding. Didn't we just find 500 containers of Sarin gas. The Dems saying "well that's not the WMD we were talking about". When Saddam should have been disclosing everything, why didn't we know about this 5 years ago.
He had proven himself willing to use WMD, he had booted the inspectors out for 4 years once leaving himself free to do whatever he wanted, and he continued to dick with inspectors. That's why we went to war. Not because we proved there was WMD prior to, but because there was evidence he did and Saddam didn't use the opportunity to prove us wrong.
But I guess this isn't another thread about that....
|