War in Iraq: Democratic Deception

A secret pre-war memo has come to light, and Democrats are using it to continue their unfounded accusations against Bush. Apparently, the memo says (although I have yet to read direct quotes from the memo) Bush's administration believed that war with Iraq was inevitable and they were going to use intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to justify it.

In accusing Bush of deception, the Democrats are creating three deceptions of their own. Unfortunately, the media is swallowing it.

Deception #1: The memo is incompatible with other statements by Bush. Bush said that going to war was a last resort, but now the memo says he thought it was inevitable and they began planning it a long time ago. Ah ha! Bush must have lied to us! No, no, no. It is possible to believe something is inevitable but still try to use it as a last resort. Diplomacy had been tried --- and failed --- several times over recent years with Saddam, and Bush even dutifully tried it again, but to no avail. So, war was inevitable, AND as a last resort. No incompatibility.

Deception #2: It is a fact that there were no weapons of mass destruction. Even some extreme conservatives (such as Michael Savage) have swallowed this one. Liberals claim that now we know there were no weapons, and that Bush tricked them into war by telling them that there were. Saddam was given plenty of free time to move or hide any existing weapons, and it is a great possibility that weapons were destroyed in the great amounts of bombing that took place in the opening hours of the war (remember all the shock and awe stuff?). So how do we know for certain that there were no weapons of mass destruction? Besides, if Saddam didn't have any WMDs, why didn't he let our inspectors in?

Deception #3: Since there were no weapons of mass destruction, the war was unjustified. Even if there weren't any weapons of mass destruction, the war is still justified. I've said this many times before: the war was a matter of logistics! We told Saddam to let our weapons inspectors in, or we'd attack him. He didn't let our weapons inspectors in. So what did we do? We attacked him. If we didn't stay true to our word, then any future demands on anyone anywhere would carry no weight. Weapons had nothing to do with the real reason for going to war. We went to war because Saddam didn't comply with us.

The Democrats have skillfully combined these three deceptions as their supporting statements to prove this "fact": Bush deliberately deceived Congress to force war. As I have shown, all three of these premises are false, and it is ludicrous to think that Bush deliberately deceived anyone. Not only because of the facts, but even from a philosophical level. What motive did Bush possibly have for wanting war in Iraq? Even liberals can't provide an answer. Why? Because there is none. Bush went to war as an inevitable but last resort, because Saddam wouldn't let us see if he had weapons or not. Case closed.

The only people deceiving anyone are the Democrats. And it's getting on my nerves that people are believing them.

Edmond the Hun