A Letter to NYTimes says we invaded Iraq because we knew were no WMDs?

[kentuck]

I have thought this for some time. Bush would never have invaded if he had thought there was a chance of WMDs. They thought it was easy pickings.
=============================================================================================
To the Editor:

Re "The Decider Sticks With the Derider" (column, April 19):

There's a conundrum hidden within Maureen Dowd's column about the failure of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. It's one I've been puzzling over since the Bush administration began its drumbeat for war in Iraq.

There is now considerable evidence — from Richard A. Clarke, the former counterterrorism adviser, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and other former members of the administration — to support Ms. Dowd's statement that Mr. Rumsfeld "wanted to invade Iraq because he thought it would be easy."

But if Mr. Rumsfeld and his colleagues truly believed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, how easy could the invasion be?

Common sense suggests only one answer: We invaded Iraq not because we thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, but because we thought he didn't.

The administration would like us to think that it was simply mistaken about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein; but that's yet another lie, and perhaps the biggest one of all.

Jack Lechner

New York, April 19, 2006

[CoffeeCat]

1. Interesting!

If they thought Saddam had WMD--wouldn't we have invaded with more troops?

Cheney's remarks about being showered with "flowers and candy" and others who made "cakewalk" comments, seem to reveal that they didn't expect any problems. If they truly anticipated biological or chemical attacks--I doubt "flowers", "candy" or "cakewalks" would have been on their minds--at all.

Also--we went into Iraq to find WMD. We started this war by dropping 10,000 bombs--some of them large bunker busters--on Baghdad, during "Shock and Awe."

How does bombing find WMD? Wouldn't bombs disperse any WMD and kill untold numbers of US soldiers and innocent Iraqis?

This all fits in with the PNAC agenda. It infuriates me--to no end--that this evil plot is showcased on their fricking Web site, but no one talks about it. It's surreal beyond measure.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. I've made exactly the same point many times.

Saddam would have had only one motive for having had WMD: to discourage any potential invasion by making it very costly for the invader. It would have made no sense for him to attack any other country without provocation. He may have been evil, but he was not crazy. The fact that we went in at all stands as strong evidence we knew he was toothless.

[kentuck]

3. Exactly...

and as I recall, many of the troops that went in initially had no protection from attack by WMDs... Which only makes the lie that much bigger.

[zbdent]

4. It also explains why we were NEGOTIATING with North Korea

instead of attacking them . . .

[Dr Fate]

13. YOU and Mr. Lecher made the point- how about Democrats on TV?

???

[Jackpine Radical]

15. That buncha wimps couldn't make a point on a pencil.

[realFedUp]

5. an angle to the invasion that wasn't really talked about

why would Bush Inc. send troops into a country
that had WMD to use on them...

[Dr Fate]

12. No one stopped Democrats from saying so, like Mr. Lecher just did.

Hopefully Democrats will learn to state the obvious one day, and stop buying this BS strategy that telling the truth about Republicans= "weak on defense."

[The Magistrate]

6. The Writer Makes An Excellent Point, My Blue-Grass Friend

There are elements of the military campaign, as well, that suggest strongly the planners were quite aware they faced no real danger of encountering chemical or biological weapons.

One of these is the heavy concentration of forces right up to the border, which would have been very dangerous were there actual prospect of, say, nerve gas or anthrax microbes being employed by Iraq. The forces could just as easily have been concentrated initially further back, and moved up to take the border on the bound.

Another is the pattern of the assault itself, in which ground forces led off, before more than a token bombardment from the air had been conducted. If there had been a real fear of such weapons being employed, there would have been a tremendous aerial bombardment pressed for weeks or months prior to the commitment of ground troops, to ensure any possible stocks and delivery systems for such weapns were destroyed: every "known location" claimed by Powell, and the countryside for a few miles around each of them to boot, would have been turned into cratered moonscape before the infantry and armor advanced.

Finally, no more than a day or two into the advamce in Iraq, soldiers began operating without chemical suits, as news coverage clearly showed. It is understandable soldiers would want to do without these, as such equipment is uncomfortable and hampering physically, but if there was real concern over danger from the weapons these are designed to protect soldiers from at headquarters, sergeants would have enforced the wearing of the equipment ferociously.

[kentuck]

7. Truth is the first casualty of war...

In this war, it was a casualty before the war even started.

[Blue_Tires]

16. good to see you again, Magistrate

[Imagevision]

8. Wolfowitz: "we invaded Iraq for WMD's because it was the only reason that

was agreed upon by the decision makers"

[sinkingfeeling]

9. Duplicate thread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x974479

[The Magistrate]

10. That Is No Problem, Ma'am

Different forums, after all.

[Dr Fate]

11. Id love to see a Democrat on TV put it in those blunt, truthful terms...

Note that Mr. Lechner, presumably a normal, everyday kind of guy, uses the word "lie" and did not seem frightened about it. I doubt the average reader would get the feeling he is "weak on defense" for being so blunt either.

None of this "mislead" garbage- but an out-right accusation that they KNEW they were "lying."

When Democrats can go on TV and talk like normal people- like Mr. Lechner, you will see us getting somewhere.

Great job from Mr. Normal Guy, USA.

[ktlyon]

14. first they never thought Saddam would let the inspectors in

then they knew if the inspectors finished their work no WMDs would be found so they had to stop them before they finished looking