Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Fine. Granted. But only if...

Pardon a brief rant. There are no links in the post below. If you don't know what story I'm talking about, I apologize for the confusion.

It’s short attention span theater out there in the blogosphere. Far too many places I am reading people siding with the New York Times “October Surprise” hit piece about missing explosives in Iraq.

Let’s leave aside the unbelievable naiveté one must have to think the Times ran with this story in good faith, and with proper editorial caution. Let’s leave aside the increasing evidence that this is no more than a rumor, with no solid source able to confirm whether the explosives in question were gone before U. S. Troops arrived. Let’s even leave aside the idiotic notion that blames the Commander in Chief for a screw up of guard duty at a remote outpost.

Let’s go right along with the worst case scenario – American troops captured these weapons, and through their own negligence let them be stolen. Now they could be in terrorist hands, and this is a terrible danger.


I’ll grant you this. But I won’t let you simultaneously continue to make the assertion that we’ve found no WMD in Iraq. WMD by definition are weapons that pose grave danger to lots of people even in small quantities, which is why they’re so dangerous in the hands of terrorists.

Either these explosives constitute weapons that pose that kind of danger in the hands of terrorists, or they don’t.

You want to say Bush lied aboutIraq having WMD? Fine.

You want to say Iraq had WMD, but Bush is to blame for letting some get away? Fine.

But please pick only one. If you’re going to oppose Bush no matter what, please don’t continue to cite mutually contradictory points as evidence of your "reasoning. "


Blogger Army of Mom said...

Yeah, I know. By running with this story, people are actually demonstrating that there were WMDs there ... but they don't want it to reflect that, so they do the standard I'm-going-to-put-my-fingers-in-my-ears-and-chant-blah-blah-blah-so-I-can't-hear-you-and-acknowledge-that-you're-right thing.

4:12 PM  
Blogger Kurt (aka Noodles) said...

I was thinking along the very same lines today but couldn't break away long enough to do any serious posting. Nice job.

4:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Silly me I always thought that "just" high explosives wouldn't count as WMD.(probably too nuanced for the likes of me) Of course these were meant for the Iraqi nuclear weapons program, so they should qualify as components.

Speaking of WMD, what about those Sarin artillery shells Saddam mixed in with his regular of those loosed on a subway platform...well just ask the Japanese about that.

Besides this is no bigger a flip flop than Kerry trying to portray himself as a hunter and sportsman!

Guess he is just boring the hell out of me.

Army of Dad

7:53 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home