I Call Bullshit on “It’s Only in Hindsight.”

The Bush administration, and even some fellow DPCers, have been passing the buck and have been promoting the false idea that it’s only in hindsight that doubts over Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are apparent. Certainly, Iraq HAD possessed WMD; however, at the time of our invasion, it wasn’t clear whether Iraq CONTINUED to possess WMD. Mr. Bush’s supporters — on this board and elsewhere — point to some quotes by Democratic officials (including Mr. Clinton and Mr. Kerry,) where they state what was the U.S. government’s public position on Iraq’s WMD: 1. That Saddam Hussein had used WMD in the past (over 10 years ago), 2. That Saddam Hussein was a dangerous man, and 3. That the U.S. would prevent Iraq from developing WMD. Here’s one of the quotes that Mr. Bush’s supporters point to, and which I lifted from another thread in the DPC message board:

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime… He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation… And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction… So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real”
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Please notice how ellipses (i.e., …) are used in the quote; indicating that it’s not a complete statement, thus Mr. Kerry’s meaning has been completely stripped. Now, Mr. Kerry’s full statement is longer, but worth reading if you’re interested in discerning his real meaning:

First, destroying al Qaeda and other anti-American terror groups must remain our top priority. While the Administration has largely prosecuted this war with vigor, it also has made costly mistakes. The biggest, in my view, was their reluctance to translate their robust rhetoric into American military engagement in Afghanistan. They relied too much on local warlords to carry the fight against our enemies and this permitted many al Qaeda members, and according to evidence, including Osama bin Laden himself, to slip through our fingers. Now the Administration must redouble its efforts to track them down. And we need to pressure Pakistan to get control of its territories along the Afghanistan border, which have become a haven for terrorists.

So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. Regrettably the current Administration failed to take the opportunity to bring this issue to the United Nations two years ago or immediately after September 11th, when we had such unity of spirit with our allies.
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 (For the full text of the speech before the Council of Foreign Relations please see here).

Mr. Kerry, in that same speech, continues:

As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don’t have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action.

The Administration must pass this test. I believe they must take the time to do the hard work of diplomacy. They must do a better job of making their case to the American people and to the world.

Please note how important sentences were completely omitted from the quote that Mr. Bush’s supporters — on this board and elsewhere — attribute to Mr. Kerry. The example of this quote is a good illustration of Bush & Co. twists facts, omit important truths and aim to deflect criticism against the Iraq war — a war of choice, and not one of necessity.

From Mr. Kerry’s full statement the following are clear:

1. Mr. Bush failed to aggressively pursue al Queda in the Afghan-Pakistan border; thus allowing Osama Bin Laden to get away.

2. Saddam Hussein is a bad man and that if permitted to obtain WMD — that is, “Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction” — would be bad, given his propensity to miscalculate. However, note that Mr. Kerry’s full statement makes it clear that there were doubts about whether Iraq possessed WMD. I’ll grant you that there’s some nuance here; however, I’d hope that my fellow citizens would have the patience to weight issues of war and peace with some serious consideration.

3. At the time that Mr. Kerry made this speech, only eight weeks before the Iraqi invasion, it wasn’t absolutely clear that Iraq possessed WMD; nor, as Mr. Kerry points out, was it clear that Mr. Bush had made a compelling case for war as the only alternative.

Again, it’s worth remembering that Mr. Bush’s rhetoric during the pre-invasion period did not hint at any doubts over the existence of Iraq’s WMD. In fact, Mr. Bush unequivocally stated that Iraq still had WMD: “The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons.” (George W. Bush, Weekly Radio Address, White House (9/28/2002). Please see Iraq on the Record: The Bush Administration’s Public Statements on Iraq.) So, even though doubts over the continued existence of Iraq’s WMD abounded, Bush & Co. sold war to the American people as if it were a clean cut case without any detractors. I sincerely wonder whether the American people would’ve supported invading another country if the serious doubts that abounded had been publicly weighted by the Bush administration (not to mention the media).

Mr. Bush and his supporters are desperately hoping that the American public will now forget the serious doubts that were voiced about the CONTINUED existence of Iraq’s WMD. It’s worth remembering that various United Nations members and millions of people around the world, were not convinced by the weak case that Bush & Co. were making for invading Iraq. The head of the U.N.’s WMD inspection team at the time, Dr. Hans Blix, reflecting back on the pre-invasion period, said:

“Well, they [the Bush administration] certainly advanced weapons of mass destruction as the decisive reason for going to war, and I think the evidence was rather weak at the time.”
Dr. Hans Blix (read the rest here)

One can argue if Mr. Bush intentionally misled us about the CONTINUED existence of Iraq’s WMD; however, one thing is not open to interpretation, because it’s a FACT: THERE WERE SERIOUS DOUBTS ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF IRAQ’S WMD AT THE TIME OF INVASION. That fact simply isn’t going away, no matter how often Mr. Bush & Co. beat us over the head with their trite excuse of, “Oh, it’s only in hindsight that doubts have come to light.” As I mentioned to a fellow DPCer on this board, to believe that it’s only in hindsight that doubts over Iraq’s WMD seem apparent, is to lie to one’s self and to willfully ignore recent history.

At the very least, Mr. Bush & Co. should: 1. Stop deploying the “it’s only in hindsight” defense; 2. Mr. Bush should acknowledge that mistakes were made; and, 3. We should not let anyone mislead us (again), by their distortions of the record and by ignoring recent history, into believing that war was the only alternative that we had before Bush & Co. invaded Iraq.