Dems keep pushing the "Bush lied about WMDs" line of attack, though thus far without much traction.
My response is that being wrong isn't the same thing as lying. Even if it is one day conclusively proved that Iraq didn't have WMDs at the time of the war, that will only have proved that Bush was wrong. And then the judgement should rest on this -- did he make the best decision based on the available information? Bush isn't omniscient, and the wisdom of his choices should be judged on what he knew, rather than 20/20 hindsight.
The President is largely dependent on our intelligence services for his information. Here's a link to the October 2002 CIA report on Iraq and WMDs. I'll quote their "Key Judgment":
"Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade."
Hat tips to Self-Composed and Annika for the link!
Posted by Discoshaman at décembre 30, 2003 02:34 AM | TrackBack