A reader complains about my “Did the Bushies Cry Wolf?” piece

Who are you addressing when you say that, “I know it’s over and I know we won, so therefore it was Right.” Yes there are some people that think that way but I do not think they make up much of your audience. Some of us have read the TNR article and still believe that the war may be justified. Some of us believe there is still too much evidence prior to this war to deny the likelihood of WMD somewhere in Iraq. I agree with Andrew Sullivan’s assessment that the TNR piece “amounts to an argument that the administration exaggerated the intelligence estimates on Iraq’s nuclear capacity and its ties to al Qaeda.” Most of us knew this ahead of time and if it is what we based our support of the war on then we were stupid.

If you want to argue with the Pat Robertson school of foreign policy go ahead but it’s not terribly difficult and it doesn’t really result in substantive dialog.

What gets me is the bolded text. Is my reader really saying “Most of us knew the Bushies were exaggerating the threat”? I certainly didn’t know that. Am I really stupid for believing the Bushies were on the level? I suspect I’m not following my reader’s logic here correctly and maybe he will clarify what he meant. To me it sounds like he’s saying, “Oh we knew the WMD threat was exaggerated by the Bushies. Politicians always do that and if you believed him then you were a sap. But there was still good reason for the war.” What those reason are are not explained. There were “some” WMDs? I don’t get it.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X