Sunday, May 07, 2006

Sully vs. Rummy

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has been unable to rely on his snake charmer's skills to quell the calls for his resignation. Mostly, the charges have come from Democrats. Because it is a violation of military law to publically criticize a superior officer, only retired generals have been able to tell the truth about his continuing bullheadedness and outright incompetence. And for years, the mainstream media fawned over his style while ignoring his substance.

Yet from the very beginning, something bothered me about the logic of a war against Iraq. Even if you accept the now completely discredited argument that pre-war Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction" and intended to give them to America's terrorist enemies, wouldn't it seem kind of STUPID to spend months advertising your intent to invade his country? Which is precisely what the Bush Administration did. Somehow, the Clinton administration had been able to contain Saddam for 8 years without any WMDs being placed in the hands of terrorists. Obviously, if Saddam had actually possessed WMDs Bush's belligerent bellowing would have tipped him off and given him plenty of time to transfer his deadly wares to Al Qaeda.

I was reminded of this when I ran across this post on the aggressively pro-war Andrew Sullivan's blog. Rumsfeld recently denied that he ever claimed there were definitely WMDs in Iraq (as opposed to strong suspicions). It wasn't hard to find the exact quote where, in fact, Rumsfeld once claimed the Iraqi WMDs were in known, specific locations. Left unsaid at the time was the fact that US troops never tried to secure these locations despite the fact that we had routed the pitiful Iraqi army in a few short days. That's where Sullivan picks up the thread:
"[Rumsfeld] subsequently cites one facility in the Kurdish area where he suspects WMDs might already have been looted by Jihadists or Saddamites. Why? Because we never sent enough troops to secure the WMDs the war was supposed to take out. In fact, for months, many key weapons sites were left to be looted by the insurgents we are now fighting. This is one mystery I've never been able to understand. We were told the war was to prevent WMDs from getting into the hands of terrorists; and yet the war-plan, with its extremely light force-structure, was designed almost to ensure that such WMDs could be easily given to terrorists by a regime that no longer had anything to lose. Can anyone explain that?"
Yes, Sully, I can explain that. This war was never really about Weapons of Mass Destruction. It was about a New World Order with America as unchallenged top dog. It was about making the Middle East safe for Israel and securing low-cost oil for the US. It had nothing to do with 9-11 and not one of the hijackers was from Iraq. And we now know that the White House had plans to invade Iraq even before the convenient cover of 9-11 was available.

If even Sully can be turned against Rummy it can't be long before the Secretary of Pre-Emptive War, citing a desire to spend more time with his family, resigns.

No comments: