Simple-minded belief is such a wonderful thing to watch, especially in the case of the dead-enders such as the Journal's own Patrick McIlheran. On his blog we get the breathless recounting of how the Loch Ness Monster of the right -- WMD's -- had been there all along based on a recounting by some "expert" by the name of David Gaubatz.
The question of course is why are we are hearing about this now, and if this is so earth shattering why this "too hot for TV" topic not showing up in tomorrow's column. I mean, this should put the matter to rest once and for all the criticisms over the grinding up of thousands of our soldiers; hundreds of thousands of the Iraqis and hundreds of billions of our dollars to create this meatloaf of a military disaster.
Even with Paddy-Mac's assignment to say something apt on Earth Day (trust he won't), you'd think this would be big time news.
But he won't. Perhaps it would be in fear of a pumped up laff track.
Once again, the WMD argument defies logic. First there is the little embarrassment about the post invasion chaos. Remember jubilant Iraqi's running off with everything from office chairs to Iraqi antiquities while our troops stood by? Remember the reports of the raids on the ammo dumps?
If there were WMD's and they made it Syria as some purport, wouldn't that again make us look like dips because just like the 3000-year-old statues, the weapons went bye bye.
So you come down to either Bush lied or there is that competence thing rearing its ugly head.
But the Bush incompetents might be off the hook on this one because logically there were no weapons in the first place.
In whipping up Americans to approve this numbskull adventure one of the arguments was look at the evil dictator who bombed his own people.
Never mind the fact that those acts, though despicable, happened 12 years prior to the proposed invasion. We had Saddam bottled up so at the time of the invasion. Saddam was really a bombing threat to no one, not even to the Kurds but Cheney et al where not playing cautious and every trumped up charge had to be thrown into the pot.
But if Saddam was so ruthless, what are WMD's for if you don't use them on invaders like us? What sense would it make to send to Syria the very think you had in place to defend yourself? Air miles? Free downloads?
I would even bet that knowing what he knew Hussein even back during the early days of the invasion could picture in his mind’s eye the noose dangling and was hopping his Bathist army could ward off our troops.
But the truth was when it came to WMD’s, he didn't have them.
So you may ask, why did he keep talking like he did have them?
That's too easy. What strong man ever acts like he is not a strong man.
Maybe that hot book and Oprah’s fave The Secret has been on Paddy's reading list. Maybe that explains why he must feel that if he believes hard enough, there were WMD's in Iraq.
UPDATE -- These rightwing WMD stories have the life span of fruit flies. The death certificate for this one is delivered over at Salon.com.