Published: Monday, June 16 2014 7:57 p.m. MDT
George Will is ignoring the fact that the Bush administration misled Congress
and the American people into believing Iraq was preparing WMD's to be used
against us.And WE the People, including Hillary Clinton, made the
mistake of believing the Republican Bush administration."Simply
stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass
destruction."- Dick Cheney August 26, 2002"Right now,
Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of
biological weapons."-George W. Bush September 12, 2002"We do know that the Iraqi regime has chemical and biological weapons. His
regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons --
including VX, sarin, cyclosarin and mustard gas. ... His regime has amassed
large, clandestine stockpiles of biological weapons—including anthrax and
botulism toxin, and possibly smallpox." - 09/18/2002, Donald
Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense (before Congress)" . . . we
don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." - Condie
RiceKnowing now that what the Bush administration was saying was
completely untrue, almost all of us who were fooled would not want the US to
attack Iraq if we had it to do all over again.
I'm glad that George didn't just speak on Libya, but rather go so far
back as to ask if we'd want to invade Iraq knowing then what we do now.
"...Given the absence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and given that
we now know how little we know about "nation-building" and about the
promotion of democracy in nations that need to be "built," and given
that Saddam Hussein's horrific tyranny at least controlled Iraq's
sectarian furies, and given that Iraq under him was Iran's adversary, and
given that 10-year wars make Americans indiscriminately averse to military
undertakings — given all this, if you could rewind history to March 2003,
would you favor invading Iraq?...".No.
This op-ed is ridiculous, another neo-con shot at the President. Is he saying
we should have invaded Libya up front? Or is he saying we should have done
nothing at all? I assume it is the former, because other countries led on
Libya. (I'm not sure why we always have to do it). How many Americans
lost their lives in that campaign. None, I believe.As for the
Benghazi committee, Will wants to expand its mission beyond its stated purpose,
to delve into bigger issues, presumably in another effort to undermine the
Administration. This phony reliance on principle was never present when Bush
was President, was it Mr. Will? Nor when Reagan was President and similar
problems in the Middle East were going on. The hypocrisy knows no bounds when
it comes to the attacks on the current President.
@GaryO - really? so those chemical weapons we found in Iraq and those Saddam
shipped to Syria that are now being used to kill civilians are just a figment of
imagination? I haven't been able to figure out how they weren't WMDs
in Iraq, but they were in Syria.....Care to enlighten us?You keep
leaving out the facts that most of the free world intelligence agencies believed
Saddam had nuclear and biological weapons, is that just another unwarranted shot
at Mr Bush? All the MSNBC accusations about "Bush lied" don't make
them true. You can have at Mssrs Rumsfeld and Feith as they showed themselves
unqualified for the job, but accusing someone of lying needs more evidence than
just talking heads rambling.
Jack -Yes Jack Really.Although Saddam did have chemical
and biological weapons a decade earlier, they were long gone before GW decided
to attack, occupy, and destroy Iraq.Sure, there was some yellow cake
uranium lying around that wouldn't even make a decent dirty bomb, and there
might have been a few gas shells lost and buried in the sand somewhere, but
there were no VIABLE WMD's that Iraq could have used against us." . . . most of the free world intelligence agencies believed Saddam had
nuclear and biological weapons . . ."No they didn't.
That's why we couldn't get the coalition of nations we wanted to back
our hand. That's why the Bush administration was so angry with France. The
French and other Western nations wisely wouldn't buy GW's half-baked
stories about WMD's threatening the West.
I always found it "interesting" that George pulled the inspection teams
searching for WMDs out of Iraq, and launched his invasion and occupation of the
country, just when those teams were about to report that they found no WMDs.
"Interesting" timing that. I guess he just didn't want to lose his
excuse to attack. And now Iraq is turning out to be George's gift that
just keeps on giving. It's too bad that we can't be rescued from the
consequences of George's so-called policy.
@GaryO, No,I mean the chemical weapons my unit found....so we didn't find
them? Says who? Someone who wasn't there, like you? That intel was from
several sources, the Brits and Germany to name a couple. They were there with us
in 2003, along with Canada, Japan, Poland, Georgia and many others......France? We caught them red handed subverting the embargo on Iraq to
contain Saddam, which allowed him to amass loads of cash and weapons despite the
sanctions and the no-fly zone, which Saddam also thumbed his nose at by shooting
at our patrol aircraft.... remember? Oh, that's right, you weren't
there so you couldn't remember.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments