Sully -
The National Review tries to rewrite history all the time.
"As Democrats and the media tell things, the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in post-Saddam Iraq proves that the war should never have been waged. But its justification always depended as much on the weapons Saddam might build as on the ones he already had built." [emphasis mine]
False. Go back to the things that Bush, Cheney, Powell and the rest of them actually said, and you'll find that simply isn't so.
And I've heard Republicans say there never would have been a vote to authorize force in Iraq if we had known what we know now about the WMD, so it's not just "Democrats and the media".
"As to the war’s morality, it should be enough to recall that Saddam tyrannized the Iraqi people — impoverished them and massacred them — and was subject to no law but his whim."
I guess the author didn't want to mention torture or imprisonment, since the Bush Administration believes that it should be allowed to imprison anyone, including American citizens, without due process, without judcial or Congressional review, and without explaining why to anyone. The lastest twist is denying a prisoner access to an attorney, because that might allow secrets about our "interrogation techniques" to get out. So we can grab someone off the street based on suspicion, hold them indefinitely without charging them, torture them, and then deny them access to an attorney because they've become aware of our "interrogation techniques".
Gentlemen, this is simply un-American.
Please spare me the argument that terrorists have no mercy, so they should be treated mercilessly. We aren't perfect, and we do make mistakes, so some of those we arrest on suspicion of terrorism are innocent. How any civilized nation can try to justify torturing innocent people is beyond me.
- Allen |
