Pre-war military intelligence
Much has been made, and rightly so, of the level of intelligence that the U.S. and its allies possessed going into the war in Iraq in 2003. Depending on what you read, you will get conflicting stories, and oftentimes, from the same sources.
Some of the following quotes are noteworthy, if for no other reason than their Kerryesque flip-flop nature:
John Kerry > January 23, 2003Hillary may have summed it up best (and forgive me if this is the last time I ever favorably quote that woman):
"Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator leading an impressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he's miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. His consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction."
John Kerry > January 31, 2003
"If you don't believe...Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." (Fortunately for the world, most of the electorate did not! - Ed.)
Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
"We know he continues to attempt to gain access to additional capability, including nuclear capability."
Al Gore > September 23, 2002
"We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Sandy Berger > February 18, 1998
"He'll use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has 10 times since 1983."
Madeleine Albright > November 10, 1999
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Speaking about the WMD's, "The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration, It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared." -Senator Hillary Clinton, April 20, 2004 on Larry King LiveAnd the left has been saying that Bush is dumb? Not so! He's so smart, he figured out how to lie to and trick Clinton and the world when he was still governor of Texas and thus not privy to such national security intelligence! If that's not a neat trick, then I don't know what is!
Now, the same Democrat and liberal advocates of disarming Saddam Hussein are now saying that Saddam never had the weapons, or that they were misled by Bush (which, going back to 1998, would have been a damned good trick). The most offensive part of all, besides the blatant undermining of support for our troops and their mission which the left allegedly support, is that these same power-hungry Democrats are blatantly disregarding their own previous statements. And rationales. And evidence. Hell, even Harry Reid accuses Bush of neglecting to provide the Senate with all the intelligence it needed, despite the fact that Harry Reid never read the NIE report anyway prior to voting to authorize the use of force in 2002!
So, what happens when those who are tired of the left's lies have the audacity to point out said lies, hypocrisies, and mischaracterizations? The left gets defensive, and accuses the other side of personal attacks! Since when is showing video evidence of the left's own words considered a personal attack? Similarly, why do the same people who scream about bringing the troops home reject the opportunity to do so on a 403-3 basis (all three supporters of immediate
What could or should we have done in Iraq to mitigate the insurgency we face today? Well, there are two things in particular that we should have done:
1. Educate the world, specifically the press, to the fact that the insurgents are overwhelmingly foreigners dedicated to preventing Iraq from recognizing freedom. They are not Iraqis, but are instead Iranians, Saudis, and Syrians (among others).
2. Since most of the foreign terrorists (affectionately referred to by the left as "insurgents") are coming in from Syria and Iran, seal the borders tighter than Michael Moore clutching a double Whopper (the sandwich, not one of his truth-challenged films).
If the left wants to put forth a plan of how to improve the situation in Iraq, I would (a) be stunned, and (b) welcome it. If they want to bellyache and henpeck to further demoralize our troops, I for one will not stand for it. Here's guessing the war-weary (yet liberal-weary) electorate will not, either.