Issues of eponymity aside, I think that maybe Bill Kristol is a little more central to neocon thought than you are, and he's right there at the top of the list, newamericancentury.org
The neocon thing is sort of a red herring, though, it's pretty clear that W shared the obsession of the PNAC people with Iraq from the beginning, way before 9/11. W's actual concern with "Islamic terrorism" is somewhat more obscure; there's no indication he had any particular interest in Al Qaeda before 9/11, despite certain intellegence briefings and the obsessions of certain other parties subject to the usual smear campaign leveled at anybody who might question the official administration line.
Anyway, you still got to connect this:
Being at the end of one's rope is not a matter of "hard evidence", it is matter of revulsion at the series of attacks we have sustained due to Al Qaida, and especially the 9/11 attacks, and the determination to act before they escalate.
with W's war in Iraq; the evidence of any substantial connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda is, to the best of my knowledge, considerably weaker that the dreaded WMD evidence was, and that's pretty darn weak. |
