I am getting so fed up with the hawks’ tireless insistence that Dubya & Co. never claimed that Iraq presented an “imminent threat.”
Let’s assume for a moment that it’s true that they didn’t in so many words — or so many others — use that line of argument. To me the natural follow-up question is this: Should U.S. foreign policy post-9/11 be putting the overwhelming majority of its intellectual, human, physical and financial resources into fighting a threat that is not imminent?
You can say a lot of things about 9/11, but it sure as hell showed that Al Qaeda was not just an imminent threat, but a proven threat. Why was it wise to drain resources from that effort?
Might the folks who died in the Bali, Istanbul, Riyadh and Madrid attacks be alive today if Dubya & Co. just stuck to the game plan? It’s impossible to know. But if they’re to get credit for Iraq, they should get some portion of the blame for those tragic events.


You must be logged in to post a comment.