“FIND WMDs OR ELSE”: Congressman J. D. Hayworth writes:
What makes the left’s “find WMDs or else” argument even more curious is that for months we were told that the president was constantly changing his rationale for war, going from WMDs to Iraq’s link to 9/11 and terrorism to human rights to regime change to introducing democracy into the Arab Middle East and back to WMDs again. The fact is, it was all those reasons, and yet the critics can now remember only one.
Furthermore, British PM Tony Blair continually and persuasively made the case for invading Iraq purely on the grounds of the gruesome and threatening nature of Saddam’s regime. Does that imply Bush has explaining to do but Blair doesn’t? That U.S. credibility is lost but Britain’s isn’t? That Basra was legitimately liberated but the rest of Iraq wasn’t?
What would have today’s left thought about 1776? How much sniping would they have done about that war, its causes, and its aftermath? Fortunately, the Weekly Standard fired up their Tardis, and found this.