that is a MUCH farther leap than what Im saying. Albeit insanely cynical.
Even in 1998 the song and dance was on.
Either Hussien NEVER had WMD. He had them and just used them a lil bit. Had them and hid them. Or both Clinton and W and both groups of congress LIED thru their teeth.
I'm curious to this question. Is it to hard to imagine Saddam had WMD and actually hid or destroyed what he had? I mean he is a bad guy but not a liar.
it's doubtful. Our military carved up Iraq extremely efficiently and the odds that they were able to destroy the infrastructure which they would've needed to build said weapons leaving behind no trace are poor. Clinton busted his ass to contain the conflict, enforce UN rules and avoid full scale intervention. The subsequent administration came in and immediately starting banging the drum.
Of course Hussein had weapons at some point, I was honestly surprised we didn't find any. My anger is in the fact that Saddam was never a threat to the US, Reagan and Bush made sure of that. Saddam's role as a legitimate threat to US SAFETY, not interests (literal safety was the point that was argued.) was never put to task by the administration and those who did question it were shouted down as unamerican. My anger is not with the war, or war itself but how casual and offhand it was. Clinton treated Hussein as the threat he actually was.
At the end of the day it doesn't matter. Wolfowitz's defense memos on preemptive intervention matter, Cheney's 1% doctrine matters, to say that my argument is "insanely cynical" is to ignore the paper trail that came from the members of the bush administration since the early 90's.