It Needed Repeating

I’ve long wondered why President Bush has failed to repeat the reasoning for invading Iraq. The logic is simple and beliefs were shared by many, including those who became critics after the fact. September 11th made clear that terrorists were no longer intent on using small scale violence or tactics such as hostage taking andh hijacking to draw attention to their political goals. A new breed of terrorists known as al-Qaeda is intent on destroying the West and killing as many people as possible in its attacks. The deaths of over 3,000 people was unmistakable. Terrorist bent on mass-casualties were naturally drawn to weapons of mass destruction.

Thus, counterproliferation quickly moved to the top of America’s national security priorities. A short list of countriesinvolved in WMD and support for terrorism was easily made: Iraq, Iran, North Korea. The undisputable fact is that Saddam had a proven history of producing and using WMD as well as supporting terrorism. Leaving him in power was a risk the President could not take anymore, which he reiterated in a recent speech.

Bush defended his decision to go to war against Iraq in March 2003 and topple Saddam Hussein, saying that after the September 11, 2001, attacks the United States could not risk the threat Baghdad posed at that time. “It is true, as I have said many times, that Saddam Hussein was not connected to the 9/11 attacks,” Bush said.

But after nearly 3,000 people died in the September 11 attacks, the United States had to decide whether it could tolerate an enemy that supported terrorism and was believed to have weapons of mass destruction, and found “this was a risk we could not afford to take.”

Sadly, I doubt anyone is listening now.