May

20

Who was Wrong about WMDs?

Filed Under War on Terror 

Recently, a friend wrote a letter to the editor of the Daily Herald, a local newspaper operating in Provo, Utah. This friend and I have been going around the tree for some time over the War in Iraq, an endeavor he views as immoral. In his letter he voices his support for our soldiers risking their lives for their country in places around the world, but feels sad that they must do so in an unjustifiable war in Iraq.

Part of his argument against the Iraq war is our inability to locate Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. He feels that George Bush cannot be trusted; that we were misled into this conflict; and that there was never any justifiable reason for invading Iraq. He has even suggested that we apologize to the Iraqi people and leave Iraq forthwith.

Now the news comes out of Iraq that a mortar shell, rigged as an improvised explosive, has tested positive for Sarin. Sarin is a deadly nerve agent so powerful that one single drop is enough to kill a man. This is hard and indisputable evidence of the presence of chemical weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Iraq did not manufacture only one of these shells. According to the reports, the shell was of a series claimed by the Hussein regime to have been destroyed previous to the Gulf War of 1991. It is highly dubious that Saddam kept only one. By all accounts, this shell should not have existed.

It was not the only evidence of WMD in Iraq to be found, however. A week earlier, another explosive device tested positive for mustard gas, another chemical weapon, considered a weapon of mass destruction and outlawed by the Geneva Convention, to which the Iraqi government is a signatory.

The news of these discoveries filled me with feelings of vindication. The evidence we had before going in was sufficient for me to support Bush in his decision. Sooner or later, I thought, the evidence would come to light.

Meanwhile, the opposition was having a hey-day. Bush was so wrong about WMD. He manufactured the evidence. The war was concocted long before 9-11. Bush knew of the attacks before they happened and did nothing to stop them.

The burden of proof was always on the Iraqi government to show complete disposal of their stockpiles of illegal weapons. There were many, here and abroad, who held that Iraq might have never had these weapons. Such a claim is easy to make, considering how hard it is to prove a negative. But they succeeded in shifting the burden of proof from Saddam Hussein to George Bush.

Those of us who supported Bush in his decision felt the pressure. My friend sent me e-mail regularly chiding me for my position, which admittedly looked out-of-step. I questioned my position long and hard. Are we doing the right thing? Are the reasons we were given apart from WMD sufficient to justify this war? I decided to keep to my position.

Now this news from Iraq: some evidence comes forth. It is enough to demonstrate that WMD did exist, and in fact still do exist, hidden somewhere in Iraq. Saddam’s government had long since removed any markings on the shell indicating the presence of chemical weaponry. It would blend into all the other conventional weapons in Hussein’s armories. The circumstances surrounding the use of this shell demonstrate that the assassin was most likely unaware that it contained three liters of chemicals which, when mixed, produce Sarin gas.

Conservative commentators and talk radio hosts were unanimous in shouting from the rooftops, “We knew it!” They also cautioned that the liberal media would downplay the finding, minimize it, or claim it was a plant.

Dave Ross, a radio commentator on the CBS Radio Network, stated today that the cache of weapons of mass destruction supposedly to be found in Iraq amounted to “a single, Sarin-tainted shell.” Now, if Saddam made one of these things, he made hundreds, or even thousands. And in my opinion, three liters is way beyond “tainted.” Dave never mentioned the mustard gas shell.

Liberals want a man like John Kerry to save them from the evil George Bush. Never mind that Kerry has taken both sides of every issue with which he has been confronted. Never mind that he admits to communications with communist forces in Vietnam after his tour of duty. Never mind that he has shown no leadership at all in the face of this national crisis. George Bush, on the other hand, has stayed with his decision despite public and media pressure because he believes it is the right thing to do. His actions are more in line with my definition of leadership.

So, the conservatives were right about WMDs. More of these discoveries will be forthcoming. And they were right about how the left in this country would react to the discovery. In essence, Liberals will do two things: 1) refuse to face reality, as they have always done, and in doing so, 2) refuse to admit that G. W. Bush was probably right, despite the intelligence failures. The evidence will not be enough for them. For my friend, it will require a “disinterested” third party, like the French, to broadcast images of piles of biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons all prepped and ready to be launched in a moment’s notice. But he still won’t vote for Bush.

Comments

Leave a Reply