BY DAN
KENNEDY
Notes and observations on
the press, politics, culture, technology, and more. To sign up for
e-mail delivery, click
here. To send
an e-mail to Dan Kennedy, click
here.
For bio, published work, and links to other blogs, visit
www.dankennedy.net.
For information on Dan Kennedy's book, Little People: Learning to
See the World Through My Daughter's Eyes (Rodale, October 2003),
click
here.
Monday, June 16, 2003
The hunt for common sense over
Iraq's WMDs. The hunt for weapons of mass destruction continues
in precisely the same manner that Generalissimo Francisco Franco is
still dead. Meanwhile, three must-reads:
1. Writing in the Ideas section of
yesterday's Boston Globe, Thomas
Powers observes that the
Bush administration's cynical use of dubious intelligence will harm
the US for many years into the future. By refusing to back the US and
Britain, the world community took a calculated risk: think of what
George W. Bush and Tony Blair would be saying today if we had found
chemical plants and nascent nuclear facilities inside Iraq. Instead,
France, Russia, et al. have all the more reason not to believe us the
next time. Maybe even the American people will wake up, although
that's probably asking way too much.
2. Nevertheless, Saddam Hussein
really did have enormous amounts of WMDs, including nerve gas, and he
really did refuse to account for them after UN weapons inspections
resumed last fall. New York Times columnist Bill
Keller can't bring himself
to admit he was wrong in backing the war. But he is absolutely right
when he observes: "It was not a Bush administration fabrication that
Iraq had, and failed to account for, massive quantities of anthrax
and VX nerve gas and other biological and chemical weapons. Saddam
was under an international obligation to say where the poisons went,
but did not."
3. So why aren't more of the
Democratic presidential candidates speaking out? Because, as
Ryan
Lizza (subscription
required) notes in the New Republic, most of them are
complicit, having expended a good deal of energy in the run-up to the
war denouncing Saddam's WMD capabilities. The silent candidates
include John Kerry, Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, and Dick Gephardt.
Even Howard Dean, who was vociferously antiwar, is being cautious for
the moment -- perhaps, Lizza writes, out of concern that WMDs may
still be found. (Bob Graham is blasting the White House, but I think
we can agree that he doesn't matter -- at least not yet.)
posted at 9:56 AM |
comment or permalink
MEDIA LOG ARCHIVES
Dan Kennedy is senior writer and media critic for the Boston Phoenix.
