Category: The Middle East

“I think we can ride this out.”

With the Weaponsgate furor still simmering (Dean has now called for an investigation), Dubya and his cronies try to confuse cause and effect in Iraq…apparently it no longer matters if WMDs are found or not, because Saddam was a bad man. In other words, the Bushie plan is, as per usual, to keep spouting the same propaganda until people start overlooking their leap in logic. Hmm…well, it seemed to work for the Iraq-9/11 connection, didn’t it?

Don’t Call it a Cover-Up.

Typical. While the term “WMD” gets more and more broadly defined by Dubya, Fleischer et al, the GOP issues a lockdown on joint and open hearings into the Bushies’ use of CIA intelligence, since “criticism of the intelligence agencies has been divisive and could hurt national security.” Um…wouldn’t misuse of intelligence agency information to start a war compromise national security too?

Preemptive Looting.

Thanks to some clever and courageous antiquarians on staff (and no thanks to the Pentagon), it turns out the Baghdad museum was not as irretrievably looted as earlier feared (although keep an eye out on Ebay for the Warka face and vase.) That’s great news for ancient historians and archivists the world over. (By way of A Small Victory.)

What did the President not know, and when did he not know it?

Whether or not WMDs are ever found in Iraq at this point, it has become increasingly clear that the Bushies were contradicting their own intelligence last September and overstating the WMD capabilities of Iraq to the UN, the international community, and the American people. Lying to America? Falsifying intelligence? As John Dean points out for CNN, we’re now entering Nixon territory. (Second two links via Pigs and Fishes and Medley.)

The “Browbeaters.”

Is Paul Wolfowitz in a 12-step program? A week after confiding to America about the “bureaucratic” thinking that motivated the WMD casus belli, Wolfowitz opens up to an audience in Singapore, telling them “we had no choice” in our Iraq policy because “the country swims on a sea of oil.” (Via High Industrial.) And now it turns out Cheney and co. were leaning hard on the CIA to come up with the “right” intelligence about Iraq’s WMD capabilities (and an Iraq-Al Qaeda connection.) Hmm…looks like it’s getting grim at WMD Search Central. Update: Jake Tapper of Salon points out that Wolfowitz’s alleged Singapore statement is based on a misquote – Wolfowitz was talking about the efficacy of sanctions, not the reasons for war.

Dropping the Other Shoe.

In a strange moment of candor, Wolfowitz tells Vanity Fair that the WMD argument for overthrowing Saddam was chosen “for bureaucratic reasons,” since “it was the one reason everyone could agree on.” (He also lends credence to the argument advanced in this Fred Kaplan article that removing troops from Saudi Arabia was one of the central purposes of the Iraq war.) Meanwhile, in the same AP story, the head of US Marines in Iraq says of the WMDs, “they’re simply not there.” Looks like the Bushies have some explaining to do…If they follow the usual pattern, I suspect they’ll answer any tough question with a flurry of 9/11-esque horror stories.

Primary Colors.

In a cover story for TIME, Joe Klein gives his take on the Democratic field. I don’t agree with everything he has to say (for example, giving Dubya a pass on Iraq), but it’s worth reading nonetheless.