LeftOut

by Daryl Moore

THE WAR ON IRAQ

A justifiable war, an unjustifiable lie

The Bush administration could have initially justified the war on Iraq by making the case that Saddam Hussein was such a monster that force was necessary to remove him from power. Hussein, after all, had starved and gassed his own people. He presided over a country for decades by instilling fear in Iraqi citizens. He tortured, maimed, and killed the families of disloyal officers and perceived traitors. Convincing Americans—and the world—that Hussein had to go was a difficult but doable task.

The Bush administration did not, however, paint Hussein as a monster whose gig was up. Instead, the administration engaged in the big lie: that Hussein had all kinds of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). The administration even pretended to know what kind and how many WMDs Hussein had: 5,000 gallons of anthrax, tons of nerve gas, hundreds of tons of toxins, mobile chemical laboratories, and Scud missiles and drones fitted with chemicals and poisons.

Now that the war is over, and Bush has declared “Mission Accomplished,” where is the evidence of WMDs? There is none. And various “unnamed administration officials” state they would be “amazed” if we ever find any.

Many Americans, having watched the war on TV and seen cheering Iraqis being liberated, might not think to ask, “Where are the WMDs?” More might ask, “Why is this question even relevant?”

It’s relevant because WMDs were Bush’s reason for war. The administration tried to convince us and the international community that Hussein and his WMDs presented a clear and present danger because he could use or turn over his WMDs to terrorists at any moment.

When Americans questioned the veracity of Bush’s statements, they were labeled “unpatriotic.” When other countries like France, Canada, and Mexico questioned the administration’s motives, they were labeled “obstructionists” who should be “punished.”

But who will be punished if no WMDs are ever found? America will. Our credibility will be shot because the international community—including those who reluctantly supported us—will be convinced that we lied about what we knew so we could gain support we otherwise could not have gotten.

The Bush administration initially sold the war on Iraq as the “War on Terror.” It then changed the designation to “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” In other words, the war, while justifiable, was based on one big, unjustifiable lie.

It’s no wonder that the war ended as it began, with a falsehood.

Fade to the USS Abraham Lincoln. Bush makes a tail-hook landing in a fighter jet. He gets out of the cockpit looking butch in a flight suit. He declares victory standing in front of a “Mission Accomplished” sign, cameras rolling, campaign 2004 ads in mind.

Fade to the White House, hours later. When asked why Bush made a tail-hook landing on a fighter jet, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer tells us the landing was necessary because the Abraham Lincoln was too far out at sea for a traditional helicopter landing. Later, when confronted with the fact that the Abraham Lincoln was well within helicopter range—something the White House knew all along—Fleisher says the president wanted to “enjoy the experience of a tail-hook landing.”

Yes, and the American people want to enjoy the experience of being told the truth in the beginning, not just at the end, after a war has been fought and 128 Americans have died after being sent off to another country with a mission that’s an unnecessary lie.

Writing from the liberal end of the spectrum, Houston attorney Daryl Moore has a general practice and is board-certified in civil and appellate law. He can be reached at DarylMoore@outsmartmagazine.com.

If you have any comments about this article, please email them to letters@outsmartmagazine.com.