This NYT headline says it all:For Diehards, Search for Iraq's W.M.D. Isn't Over
3 years after invading a country, deposing its leader, losing 2500 soldiers and expending billions of dollars, it is time to close any investigation into whether there were WMD in Iraq. Instead of recognizing that documentation and potential hard evidence of the existence of WMD may be discovered years after a short but devastating war with its terrorist aftermath, the NYT treats anyone that has not accepted its "case closed" verdict as on the fringe of rational thought.
The article treats investigative attorney John Loftus, Senator Rick Santorum, Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan and others as so many conspiracy nut cases.
Maybe the current evidence is damaging to the anti-war bias of the NYT. But as Iraq continues towards its eventual democratic freedom, the investigations will prove the movement of WMD pre-invasion.
Is it not prudent to find out where they went? That is, besides the 500 canisters recently reported discovered. I guess they do not exist either.Skip March
Frankly I happen to believe there has been plenty of evidence that WMD's do exist and that much of that stockpile (as it is) was moved to Syria. That being said, it is nuts for supporters of our efforts in Iraq to continue to succumb to the messaging driven by Dems and the MSM. There were plenty of reasons other than WMD's to topple Saddam....I won't go into them here as it will only be a rehashing of want we already know.
In their messaging to the public Republican leadership, particularly in Congress, has accepted premises put forth by the MSM, like WMD's and the "nuclear option" over judicial appointments. Why didn't Republicans respond by arguing that the Dems threat to filibuster those hearings was actually the nuclear option. Instead they referred to their own threat to change Senate rules as such...mind boggling. It seems though that this Administration has gotten part of that messaging problem as they playing down the recent WMD discovery.
The administration’s marketing of its programs is atrocious. I am sure their progressive approach to social security reform, their amazing success in priming the economy through supply-side tax cuts, their partial attempts at free trade, their pursuit of estate tax elimination and, of course, their aggressive actions against Islamic fascism could be more accepted by the non-Koskids Left than polls indicate. While he is a proven election winner, GW seems to need advice in PR.