I just heard General Meyers on CSPan say :
Zarkawri, who is absolutely amoral, will do anything , kill anybody, to see that his view of the world is upheld…..”

I just shook my head and asked “So how is he different from this administration?” since this is excatly how we could describe our business in Iraq.

Wolfowitz also just mentioned something about The Duelfer Report, and siad “which almost noone has read”, all in speaking of Saddam’s continued security apparatus as being responsible for much of the insurgency….

Imhofe (Republican from some southern state) keeps mentioning their belief in connections between Al-Quieda and Iraq……Wolfowitz says that “Duelfer Report, which almost nobody has read…” actually contains some things that supposedly vindicate their invasion of Iraq???!! (apparently you are either blind or have not yourself, or are just plain self-deceived, Mr. Wolfowitz)….the Duelfer Report blows out of the water, Mr. Imhofe, and Mr. Wolfowitz, your out-of-touch with reailty (he’s on the media now— telling us all lies; helping the enemy, blah blah blah.)
Meyer just said “If we could just beam in any of these men, to tell you what they are seeing”. This is a bluff; to feign truth to what they are claiming. I said “Do it right now, buddy”. Bring em’ in. You do NOT want this.”

Below is some summary of the Duelfer Report’s findings, which baaically blew away the Administration’s claims, but which they still tried to use to claim that they had somehow been right to go to Iraq. The report included some puzzling assertions in it, given the complete lack of actual evidence to support the claims:

The administration actually tried to use the most minute details that gave the smallest sliver of minute “bad intentions” by the Iraq regime, to bolster the ir arguments. But the report blew this out of the water.

Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq’s weapons programs, said Hussein’s ability to produce nuclear weapons had “progressively decayed” since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of “concerted efforts to restart the program.”

The findings were similar on biological and chemical weapons. While Hussein had long dreamed of developing an arsenal of biological agents, his stockpiles had been destroyed and research stopped years before the United States led the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Duelfer said Hussein hoped someday to resume a chemical weapons effort after U.N. sanctions ended, but had no stocks and had not researched making the weapons for a dozen years.

this is from the Washinton Post’s summary

Hussein, the report concluded, “aspired to develop a nuclear capability” and intended to work on rebuilding chemical and biological weapons after persuading the United Nations to lift sanctions. But the report also notes: “The former regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after sanctions. Neither was there an identifiable group of WMD policy makers or planners separate from Saddam” tasked to take this up once sanctions ended.

The document rules out the possibility that biological weapons might have been hidden, or perhaps smuggled into another country, and it finds no evidence of secret biological laboratories or ongoing research that could be firmly linked to a weapons program.

The evidence included in the report to back up claims of Hussein’s intent is described as “extensive, yet fragmentary and circumstantial.” The report quotes a single scientist who reached that conclusion in hindsight and based on information he learned from the U.S. inspection team long after U.S. troops had captured Iraq.

Amazingly, the Washhinton Times (well, maybe not so amazing) actually tried to use it in the same way:

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20041007-092535-2936r.htm

The fact is that U.N. sanctions did have a debilitating effect on Iraq and Saddam’s weapons programs. But as the report notes, “Saddam’s primary goal from 1991 to 2003 was to have UN sanctions lifted, while maintaining the security of the Regime. He sought to balance the need to cooperate with the UN inspections — to gain support for lifting the sanctions — with his intention to preserve Iraq’s intellectual capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of face.”

Well, DUH! Again, nobody disputes that Saddam is and was BAD. Nobody disputes that he was TRYING to do more bad things. The point here, people, is that we went in and violently destroyed lives. So many Iraqis have said that they preferred life under Saddam to life under the occupation. And it will not end after official OCCUPATION is over. The “interests” of the United States, until our own criminal regime is ousted, will be hell for life in Iraq for the ordinary citizen.

The above quote from the Washinton Times is just one of many that seek to extract vindication from an obviously evil and botched plan. To say that Saddam WANTED to do bad things totally obscures the fact that he had been DEFANGED after Gulf War I (which the Duelfer Report sattes and subtantiates over and over). To say that Saddam WANTED to worm his way out is to state the obvious. To say that we prevented an “immanenent danger” is to advance a boldfaced LIE. To go back and use this as “justification” is to change horses about the whole war rationale.

It is truly a scary government we have.