Democrat Quandry

Congressional Democrats, who in large numbers voted for the Iraq war, are now claiming that they were not given the complete dope in the intelligence briefings they received. True, no doubt, but nonetheless a tenuous thread upon which to hang their defence.

Saddam may have had weapons of mass destruction. We didn't know. But even had he had them, could anyone believe he was a threat to the U.S.? He may be a murderous monster, but he's not stupid. It would have been suicide. Was he a threat to U.S. interests? Maybe, but it's more likely that he was just in the way. Those "interests" can be summed up in one word: oil.

There was some very questionable "intelligence", such as uranium from Niger. I seem to recall the threat of fishing boats off the eastern seaboard firing rockets into U.S. citiies. Did anyone ask who's fleet was involved, and where were the modifications carried out to enable a launch? It was claimed that Saddam and Al Quaeda were linked, when it was common knowledge that those two couldn't stand each other. Saddam's regime was secular; as an example, his foreign spokesman, Tariq Aziz, was Catholic There were others questionable items. I was no more informed than anyone, but I was sure the whole thing was a pile of crap.

The Democrats ran with the crowd, echoing the old cry, even from the lips of Hillary Clinton: if you're not with us, you're against us. Any one who dissents is a traitor.

There is a saying that if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging. I give the Democrats credit for that much. Cheney and Bush just keep digging. And maybe, just maybe, the Democrats will develop some spine.