Forget about the WMD, it was a smokescreen. The President knew it, the VP knew it, the Republicans knew it, and the Democrats knew it. It was a sales tool to get the world to accept the invasion of Iraq. WMD was one of several reasons for the attack. The others were complicated, difficult to sell to the American public and 'unmentionable in public. Iraq was the second stage of a long range plan to transform the Middle East and destroy Al Qaeda in the process.
We often think of foreign affairs in a simplistic terms. Someone hits us, we hit back. I don’t think we, as Americans, are well known for subtle diplomacy. However in this case it might help to take a longer view. It is not hard to think of the Middle East as a social and political sewer, where dictators and extremists control almost all aspects of society.
Yes, there are some exceptions, but not many. Most countries are breeding grounds for Muslims extremists. Iran is a growing problem. Saudi Arabia was the home of most of the hijackers and is the center of Wahabi Islam, the most extreme of the extremists. Syria supports terrorists and, at the time of 9/11, completely dominated Lebanon. Egypt practices a dictatorial "democracy" with a growing militant populace. Libya was developing nuclear weapons and supporting supporting terrorism, and Pakistan was a strong supporter of the Taliban. There is more, but you get the idea.
After deposing the Taliban, the U.S. faced a next-move problem, what to do? Bush and the neocons were not blind to history in Afghanistan. They had no intention of making the same mistake the British and Russians made. The U.S. wanted a friendlier government in Afghanistan, not necessarily a Western style democracy. Capturing bin Laden was less important than destroying the foundation of his support. Looking at the long term, the government, led by the White House, saw Iraq as the next logical step. They would eliminate Saddam, a truly bad guy, begin the transformation of the region by installing a democracy, assuming they were successful.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - [MR]Chip
Libya had been laying diplomatic groundwork for years (see the involvement of Ghadaffi's son in Italy). Syria is cooperating with the US by, eh, torturing their prisoners for them? Pakistan, the great nuclear proliferator and motherland of the Taliban, is not an ally. It's walking a tightrope. Palestine had elections before. Iran is the big winner in this situation, they can do what they want.
You seem to be starting with your domino theory first and then looking for things that can back it up. Maybe next time try the other way around?
2 - Shaun Omac
I agree this administration as I said on the radio show last night, is wiping its collective asses with the constitution and the truth.
King George and his minions must go !!!
3 - JP
Well written, thought provoking. Still, let's think about this:
1. It is well documented that there were more reasons. "For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on." - Wolfowitz, 5/28/03.
2. By not explaining all the rationale and waiting to build a consensus, don't you set yourself up to lose public support when the house of cards falls?
3. You say the M.E. is a "social and political sewer" and that many countries are breeding grounds for Muslim extremists. Doesn't the long history of Western manipulation of the Middle East (Britain's carving up of Iraq included) factor into why this might be? So to solve the mess the West created, the West must manipulate even more?
4. Exactly what are we "Remaking" the Middle East into? A safe place without terrorists that will "leave us alone", or a place friendly to American business and willing to sell us oil? The implications are vastly different. We're being sold the first while actually seeking the second, and this is a big problem.
5. About distrust of the average American's judgment, the constant barrage of propaganda from the Bush Administration is one of the main reasons people continue to believe Saddam was involved in 9/11. That's an effect, not a cause.
6. We can't just yank troops out, but we should be planning a departure. Our presence IS one of the biggest destabilizing factors in Iraq now. We can't rebuild the world in a business-friendly way, per PNAC, if we can't even run our own country well. Thru Abu Garib we've lost any claim to moral superiority that we might've had.
4 - gonzo marx
oh my..and here i had thought the card carrying NeoCon Apologists were about extinct
except for the World Bank and the VP's office, of course
but i digress...
Excelsior!
5 - Pratyush
It took this long to realise WMD wasnt the real agenda for attacking Iraq?
6 - gonzo marx
no...it took this long for the NeoCon types, and the rest of the GOP...to admit it
Excelsior!
7 - Kane
Ha, the left's trying to "smokescreen" General Sada (and the other General who's name I can't recall... Al-Tikriti or something), reports of the Russians helping to move Iraq's WMDs, the reports of unchecked WMD sites in Iraq, and of course the Saddam Tapes. I've seen one response, and it was to the tapes. "Right wing BS". And they moved on. Pathetic. Oh, and if you still think "Well we would have noticed the WMDs being moved!" you need to read about it more before you talk.
8 - ss
Why not invest in Jordan in exchange for further democratization/secularization? Why not make Jordan the beacon of hope and change in the Middle East? How about better trade deals with Turkey if they stop jailing journalists and authors?
I know most of you will say 'oil', and you're not wrong about us wanting to secure oil, but there was another reason.
War. Sadam gave Bush what he really needed, an evil dictator to justify a war when Bush really needed one.
Creating a country freedom and democracy can spread from in the Middle East is still a good idea.
We just have to believe in it so much we'll commit to it when all we get out of the deal is peace.
9 - skeptic
"One only has to read the various surveys indicating things like 20% of America still think Saddam had direct involvement with bin Laden and 9/11, or that only 40% of Americans believe in evolution, 13% do not know what a molecule is, 1/5 of Americans still think the Sun circles the Earth, and only about half know that humans did not live during the time of dinosaurs..."
I don't believe the percentages are that high.
10 - first grader
I always suspected that rednecks are linguistically challenged,
11 - RogerMDillon
Everyone knows that 73% of percentages are made-up.
12 - WB
Do you guys read or watch the news as of yesterday they admitted that we have tapes going back to 1989 linking bin laden to iraq. Just so happens saddam taped all of his meeting and they are now being made public. Not only that but the u.s intel knew for a fact that bin laden's op's guy met with iraqi intel in the phillipines in 2000 why they havent admitted it I don't know. We also know that the russians helped move the wmd's out of iraq days before our invassion and dummped them in the baltic sea we are not guessing we know.
13 - mike
the invasion of Iraq was a good idea in theory it was purely aimed at destroying iraq-iran-syria axis, it had indeed worked in a way after all we really do not care what happens in iraq as long as its decentralized it is pliable and poses no danger. syria is all but finished with almost no oil and near total isoaltion what will let it survive? Iran on the other hand is not finished and it would of been much more sensible to attack iran first which would of weakened the shia terrorist, and destroyed syria more rapidly leaving only saddam who was weakened by decade of isolation to stand
14 - mike
the invasion of Iraq was a good idea in theory it was purely aimed at destroying iraq-iran-syria axis, it had indeed worked in a way after all we really do not care what happens in iraq as long as its decentralized it is pliable and poses no danger. syria is all but finished with almost no oil and near total isoaltion what will let it survive? Iran on the other hand is not finished and it would of been much more sensible to attack iran first which would of weakened the shia terrorist, and destroyed syria more rapidly leaving only saddam who was weakened by decade of isolation to stand
15 - ThatGayConservative
What was the reason, again, for the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 which was signed by lord BJ?
16 - Joanie
Chip, I'm really impressed with your vision on long term foreign policy. Really, really impressed. Thank you for this.
17 - Dave Nalle
This isn't exactly a revelation. I made essentially the same observation a year and a half ago.
Iraq just happens to be in a great location and was vulnerable. The real objective is to pressure its much more dangerous neighbors and destabilize the region.
Dave
18 - JP
WB, you must be talking about this nonsense. The point of this is it's really irrelavent whether there were WMD.
I have suggested to friends in the past (usually over a few drinks! lol) that even if an "anti-war" President were elected, if that's even possible, there are forces beyond the President's control that would continue this initiative even if he didn't want it. Some terrorist act or some act of aggression by one of the nations involved would demand that we become involved over the President's wishes.
The sad thing is we've handled Iraq so badly that we've weakened our ability to handle the real threats, Iran and N. Korea. But, we demanded a Shrubbery, and we got one!
19 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I've mentioned before, and I'll remind you all again. If the gun isn't aimed at your head, it is easy to ignore it. The WMD's were not aimed at you - they were aimed at us. We had every reason to pay attention to them. We still do.
Saddam Hussein envisioned himself as a latter-day Nebuhhadnetzar - you know, the guy who destroyed Solomon's Temple when Jeremiah was still around to write his jeremiads... Ssddam Hussein even had a new version of the city of Babylon built for himself with pictures of him instead of the ancient Babylonian emperor. He had the goal of repeating Nebuhhadnetzar's achievement. Wiping out the Jewish state.
The WMD's were moved out of the country before the Americans attacked - why, I can't tell you. Does it matter now with respect to your debate over whether you should have soldiers there? No. I just have the nasty feeling that we in Israel have not heard the last of them.
20 - nitpicker
Dave believes:
"Iraq just happens to be in a great location and was vulnerable. The real objective is to pressure its much more dangerous neighbors and destabilize the region."
Destabilize the region?
If so, it was a great success.
We have succeeded in paying more for energy and running up our trade imbalance even more.
I'm sure the next chapter will give us even more success.
21 - Dave Nalle
Nit, I don't 'just happen to believe' anything. I draw conclusions based on evidence and logic.
And yes, that's why we picked Iraq. Even if we failed, the destabilization of a civil war would still produce a very desirable chaos in the region and divert a lot of resources from neighboring countries. Kind of like removing the dampening rods in a nuclear reactor and letting it melt down.
Dave
22 - nitpicker
It is likely we will achieve the melt down in the next chapter.
23 - nitpicker
Dave’s conclusion:
“And yes, that's why we picked Iraq. “Even if we failed, the destabilization of a civil war would still produce a very desirable chaos in the region…”
If destabilization was our objective, we could have saved over 2,200 American lives and up to a trillion dollars by simply lobbing a few dozen cruise missiles at the mosques in Iraq.
24 - Dave Nalle
The cruise missiles at the mosques would have just gotten them angrier at us and done nothing for us. Now we have them angry at the Wahabbis and at least relatively neutral towards us. A much better situation.
Dave
25 - nitpicker
If chaos is the objective, the missiles would have caused more chaos.
The more anger, the more chaos.
It doesn't matter who made them mad.
What we have been doing in the Middle East is like poking at a hornet nest.
The more we poke. the madder they get.