In early 2003, the Bush administration made claims that Iraq was a threat to the United States because it had Weapons of Mass Destruction. In addition, it was claimed that Iraq supported terrorism, and we couldn’t take the chance that the WMD could fall into terrorists hands. Using this information as a justification, the United States attacked Iraq, and succeeded in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, a brutal tyrant.
Now, one year later, no evidence of WMD has yet been found, and most investigators now say that the WMD didn’t exist. Evidence that Iraq was supporting terrorism also has been sketchy at best. The Bush administration now claims that the benefit of invading Iraq was that we removed a brutal tyrant, which is true, and the world is now a better and safer place.
Interestingly, in early 2003, based upon what I read, I supported attacking Iraq. And now I think that it was a terrible mistake. In fact, had the Bush administration tried, in 2003, to promote attacking Iraq based on what they are saying in 2004, they most likely would have been laughed at. Had I known that for $87 billion, and the loss of many American lives, we could overthrow a brutal tyrant, who apparently was not in possession of WMD, I would have thought that there are many better uses for that $87 billion, and that this was not something on which to risk American soldiers’ lives. Imagine what good things we could have done with that $87 billion.
Worse yet, it now appears that the real effort of combatting terrorism slowed down while America diverted its attention to Iraq. Much of that money could have been used to track down Osama bin Laden and the rest of his Al Qaeda thugs. But it was not used that way.
How did this happen? In one view, the Bush administration basically used only that intelligence information that conformed with its view about Iraq and ignored other information that was contradictory to its view about Iraq. In another view, it was the CIA, FBI and other intelligence sources that provided Bush incorrect information about WMD in Iraq. Regardless, Bush was misinformed. He was opposed to Congress appointing a commission to look into how this happened, until pressured by Congress and public opinion. And even so, we do not hear from Bush, as we heard from an earlier President, “The buck stops here.” Bush does not accept any responsibility for this, and continues to claim the invasion of Iraq was a success. Had I been misled by the intelligence agencies, as Bush may have been, I would have heads rolling. I would be infuriated. And yet Bush didn’t even want to investigate, much yet step up to the plate and claim “The buck stops here”.
Do I feel safer today because of the United States invasion of Iraq? No, I do not. It apparently has not helped the fight on terrorism. Al Qaeda operates today in many places in the world. Do I feel that the Bush administration can make proper use of the next bit of intelligence that might come our way? No, I do not. If the problem was the way Bush cherry-picked intelligence, or if the problem was that the intelligence agencies failed, I see no evidence that things have improved in any way.