One Man's War
Nov. 27th, 2005 11:00 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jducoeurY'know, the thing that annoys me most about the ongoing argument about Iraq is the way that everyone is still letting BushCo define the terms of the argument. I mean, let's get real: WMDs were never the reason we invaded Iraq, they were the excuse. That was perfectly obvious, even at the time.
Cast your minds back a bit. Was the invasion of Iraq a surprise? Did we suddenly find that the 9/11 hijackers had been supported by Baghdad, forcing us to do something about it? Of course not. No one was surprised at all, because everyone had known for years that Bush was obsessed with Saddam. And that was really why we went to war. WMDs were an excuse; terrorists were an excuse. The fundamental reason why we went to war was because the President had always wanted to.
I'm really surprised that no on in the media is loudly calling him on this. I would have expected someone to document his obsession with the subject, which was perfectly well understood even at the time of his election, and body-slam him with it. I mean, the reality that no one in Washington really wants to talk about is that he simply wore everyone down. He'd been beating the Iraq drum for so long that, when he came up with what appeared to be a viable excuse, they all threw up their hands and let him have his damned war.
That was a bad idea at the time, and reflects poorly on everyone involved. But in the final analysis, I think history will find that this war was completely and utterly personal, and the biggest of Bush's big lies is trying to spread the blame around. If things had gone well, he would, with all justification, be hoovering up most of the credit for what was thoroughly his war. It's utterly shameful that he's not willing to accept that blame...
Cast your minds back a bit. Was the invasion of Iraq a surprise? Did we suddenly find that the 9/11 hijackers had been supported by Baghdad, forcing us to do something about it? Of course not. No one was surprised at all, because everyone had known for years that Bush was obsessed with Saddam. And that was really why we went to war. WMDs were an excuse; terrorists were an excuse. The fundamental reason why we went to war was because the President had always wanted to.
I'm really surprised that no on in the media is loudly calling him on this. I would have expected someone to document his obsession with the subject, which was perfectly well understood even at the time of his election, and body-slam him with it. I mean, the reality that no one in Washington really wants to talk about is that he simply wore everyone down. He'd been beating the Iraq drum for so long that, when he came up with what appeared to be a viable excuse, they all threw up their hands and let him have his damned war.
That was a bad idea at the time, and reflects poorly on everyone involved. But in the final analysis, I think history will find that this war was completely and utterly personal, and the biggest of Bush's big lies is trying to spread the blame around. If things had gone well, he would, with all justification, be hoovering up most of the credit for what was thoroughly his war. It's utterly shameful that he's not willing to accept that blame...