Personally, I think the WMD line is just war marketing, the real reasons lie elsewhere. If W was willing to be honest about the real reasons, I might take him a little more seriously.
I partly agree with you, the WMD line is war marketing. I disagree inasmuch as I believe that Bush really believes that Saddam's WMDs are a real threat to the US, on what evidence I don't know yet.
But if you think it's difficult to get allies with the WMD marketing, consider the results of giving out the real reason: The US is stuck trying to implement a failing containment strategy, which everybody else (this means you too, allies!) is happy to undermine. So the US is stuck paying for the patrols, takes the hit as an aggressor, and worst of all looks weak and ineffectual, since Saddam survives with ever more $, and parades the bodies of dead babies at intervals besides. So the US looks aggressive, cruel, weak and decadent all at once -- a big fat target for terrorists, 'shielding' the Europeans. Well, we are not going to play this game anymore. We declare new rules.
How do you think that line would sell? Would you give Bush more respect if he tried it? |
