Conflicted About War

I think it’s no secret that I’m conflicted about war with Iraq. I plump, tentatively, in favor of it, but respect deeply some of my friends who oppose it. (I don’t respect all who oppose it since a great many of them seem like ninnies or cads. On the other hand, some of the people who support war seem to me to be sinister people too.) Part of what has bothered me has, of course, been the reservations of the Holy Father in this department. But even more has been the queer reluctance of the Bush Administration to give us much to go on as far as the gazillions of WMDs that they keep saying they are sure about. Greg Krehbiel (no Euroweenie he) sums it up nicely: “We want facts, Mr. President — facts and cold logic — before we go to war.” He too has the same curious sense I do that there’s a stampede for war with an odd vacuum in the reasoning department.

You don’t have to be a Lefty to think this. All you have to do is look at Peg Noonan, who points out the same thing the Bushies are obviously thinking (since they are now–finally–talking about “making a case”): namely, that the case has not been made. She would not need to advise them on how to make the case if they had made it already.

Rather than making a case, what seems to happen is what Krehbiel complains of: assertions without details and evidence like in this story. There’s only a limited window of time before the chance to garner support for this war dries up. A public whose formative experience of trusting government when it goes to war was the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and its aftermath is a public you better be prepared to give some solid facts to. That’s just life in these here United States, Mister President.