"I can trace the story of a senior terrorist operative telling how Iraq provided training in these weapons to al-Qaida."He's referring to al-Libi, who provided information under torture and recants everything. That is one of the mis-truths you can read about in this excellent piece by Mother Jones Magazine called Lie by Lie.
Well, we're off again. Now, the White House is proclaiming that Iran is arming insurgents in Iraq. The New York Times and the Washington Post are quoting unnamed sources who say they have evidence of this link. I wonder if this is the same level of evidence that lead then Donald Rumsfeld to say, of Iraq's purported WMD:
"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."As you may have read, they weren't anywhere. And eventually, Donald Rumsfeld resigned, forever to be remembered as the guy who said stuff, on camera, and then denied he ever said it.
Anyway, lets say for a moment they are right. Lets give them the benefit of the doubt and say that Iran, a predominantly Shia state is in fact arming the insurgents in Iraq who are primarily Sunni. Lets say, even though this administration has been wrong on almost every turn, (greeted as liberators, won't take a lot of troops, won't cost more than 50 million, WMD, link to 911, etc), lets say they are right this time.
The question becomes, of a state arms someone, is it a reason to declare war one them? The answer, of course, is no. If it's yes, so many countries in the world would have the justification to attack the US. Look, at times it was politically expedient to arm Saddam and Iraq in the war against Iran. It was also expedient to arm anyone battling the soviets.
But think about it. Even if some of the people in Iran are supporting insurgents, that isn't a reason to invade. It just isn't.
No comments:
Post a Comment