Ted Rall must have a bit of the Forest Gump in him. Ignore for a moment the fact that Rall completely telegraphs the “no proof great enough” strategy of his ilk, and that the sarin was in a banned and undeclared rocket delivery system developed after all quantities of sarin supposedly had been destroyed. He can’t even get the foaming mouth anti-war propaganda he professes to subscribe to right.
The report that a roadside bomb attack may have used a shell that contained sarin nerve agent has the right wing media all atwitter. Aha! WMDs!
While there’s something to the notion that where there’s one mouse there are a dozen more living in your wall, the possible presence of sarin in one cannister hardly justifies invading Iraq at a cost of more than $150 billion, 30,000 dead Iraqis (the number comes from the Bush Administration, courtesy of Bob Woodward’s “Plan of Attack”) and 1,200 dead coalition troops.
More to the point: Even if we were to discover enormous warehouses full of nuclear weapons, the war still wouldn’t have been justified. The point being, the US claimed that it KNEW that Iraq had WMDs when it clearly did not. Guessing correctly doesn’t count, not that that’s what happened here.Buzzz…
Obviously I read too many blogs because I know the DU spin on the origins of the WMD, chapter and verse. Iraq had WMD’s because the US propped up Saddam and gave him all of his WMD stockpiles before Gulf War I. The only debate is whether you trusted Saddam’s government when they claimed to have destroyed everything. Ted needs to brush up on his liberal dogma…