Monday, March 29, 2004

The Question We Should Be Asking (washingtonpost.com): "I suppose I should be more interested in what is (or was last week) the question of the day: Did our government have reason to know that something like Sept. 11 would happen and, if so, who failed to take appropriate preventive action?

But I can't get past the previous question: Why are we in Iraq?"


I must admit, I've never read a column by Mr. Raspberry before. Maybe I should state doing so more often, as he seems to have cleared up a point I've been very confused about for almost a week now: why is Clarke such a big deal?

It seems to me that the biggest thing he can add to the 9/11 commission is what everyone else can add: "we didn't see it coming, we probably should have, but we likely wouldn't have been able to prevent it all the same." But, strangely, Clarke is more enduring. Why? Because of his book, the topic of which is mainly concerned with why we shouldn't be in Iraq. It seems that President Bush has finally succeeded in tying the War in Iraq to the War on Terror, if only in the minds of liberals. Everytime one hears mention of the latter, he immediately goes into attack-mode regarding the latter.

I don't want this to be a long post, so I'll end with this: if the biggest complaint the Left has about W's prosecution of the War on Terror is that, when it wasn't quite necessary, we deposed a murderous dictator who wanted with all his heart to pose a threat to the United States, then they're seriously running out of steam.

No comments: