All Things Reconsidered
July 1, 2003
by Alexander Washburn

Great Moments in Revisionist History

As the fruitless search for weapons of mass destruction continues President Bush once again tried to put critics of his failed foreign policy in their place saying those still demanding answers and results were engaging in "revisionist history." Excuse me – but Bush should be the last to talk about looking back into history and drawing the wrong conclusions. In his State of the Union, Bush rallied off transgressions committed by Saddam Hussein that went back almost a decade and used this as the basis for his misguided wrong war. This is your war Mr. President: the good and the bad. It all can’t be "shock and awe" and landing on air carriers. Bush owes it to the American people and to the families of servicemen and women who lost their lives to uncover that booty of weapons we heard so much about in the months leading up to the war. Supporters of the war often state the obvious that Hussein is a murderous tyrant and the world is better off without him as a head of state. True – but find me one credible Democrat running for President who already didn’t think that. The fact is, Americans lined up for the war because they were sold a bill of goods that said Hussein was a threat to America and that at any minute he could unleash an attack with weapons of mass destruction on this country. We didn’t sign up for a war because Hussein ranks within the Top 10 on the Amnesty International Human Rights abuses watch list.

Conservative icon and interleague play opponent George Will echoed this point in his syndicated column in the Paper of Record (NY Post). Will wrote: "Unless one is prepared to postulate a U.S. right, perhaps even a duty to militarily dismantle any tyranny – on to Burma? – it is unacceptable to argue that Saddam’s mass graves and torture chambers suffice as retrospective justifications for pre-emptive war." Not to be outdone, Robert George another conservative, yet unclear where he stands on interleague play, called for Bush to fire someone from his war council because weapons have yet to be found. George wrote: "The mission was a success, but one thing can’t be ignored: Whether or not weapons are found, blatantly false information still got into the president’s State of the Union address this year… This isn't acceptable. Someone has to bear some responsibility."

Don’t hold your breath waiting for Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, or Paul Wolfowitz to get their walking papers anytime soon. However, the last thing Karl Rove expected was that conservatives would question the White House on the war front. That, coupled with a recent CBS poll that finds 44 percent (and rising) of Americans feel the president overestimated the number of weapons of mass destruction, and those who feel that the economy is the only Achilles heel this president has need to go back to the blackboard.

Depends on Your Definition of Liberated

Weapons of mass destruction are not the only things turning up missing in Iraq. Whatever happened to those American ideals Bush told us we were bringing in bagfuls to the newly "liberated" people of Iraq? L. Paul Bremer III, the head of the America military occupation in Iraq last week cancelled what American officials said would have been the first free election since Saddam relocated to Syria, Iran or Dearborn, Michigan – depending on who you get your news from. Not only did the U.S. cancel the elections but military forces treated "free speech" particularly interesting by storming a local political party in Iraq and jailing the members. We really shouldn’t be surprised that the White House feels dissent isn’t healthy political debate – look what happened to dissenters here in the "land of the free" – they were called un-American, were boycotted and blackballed by influential corporations with conservative ties like Clear Channel Communications who barred the Dixie Chicks from the radio. The New York Times David Roche hit the nail on the head by writing: "The events here exposed an uncomfortable truth of the American occupation. For now, American officials are barring direct elections in Iraq and limiting free speech, two of the very ideals the U.S. has promised to Iraqis."

The result of canceling the election and going back on a promise, not just to Iraq but to the international community, has caused violence and protest to rear its ugly head again. Over 1,000 took the streets to oppose Bremer’s edict and the Sunni’s, which represent about 20 percent of the population in central and northern Iraq getting angrier and more violent as each day of American occupation passes. Thankfully the Shiites of southern Iraq, which make up 60 percent of the population have yet to get really pissed off. But when that happens – America will have another war on its hands and here we thought the President declared the war over and major fighting completed? The lack of a clear post-Iraq strategy is yet another in a string of poor international and domestic calculations by President Bush.

(Alexander Washburn is a volunteer staff writer for 2 Walls Webzine.)