First of all, I'm not interested in saying I told you so, but this information, I find, has been generally ignored, and is still not common knowledge, at least not to all of the general public. We all had busy lives, that allowed only for limited time to digest what the media was putting out there, and it put out a lot, at that time. We now know much more, but this tell is one not often looked at, in retrospect, and it was a hell of a tell.
It has generally been shown that the BA took us to war in Iraq for other reasons than the ones stated at the time. The evidence on that much is overwhelming, at this point. Since then, the justification has gone through a number of versions, whatever was politically expedient at the time, but the truth is, anyone paying attention on March 7, 2003, which most of us weren't, obviously, could have easily deciphered that Bush was lying about his justifications for going into Iraq.
In a very lucid article that reflects my own experience of disbelief at Bush policy at the time, Steve Leser lays out what you should have seen, and what you should have known, that could have stopped this war, before it even started. The truth is, the media glossed this over and beat the BA drum of war, when we all should have been saying "Wait a damn minute". I know I was. The Article


Comments: 13
Now, 6 years later ...
Personally, I think Saddam was a despot that had mass graves of his citizens all over the country, violated the missle treaty and made threats to Israel, but did that justify the war?
No. He had grand ambitions to be more threatening, but as you outlined, he was kept in check.