Paul Krugman NAILS the Iraq War Liars!
Jeb Bush definitely did us a favor: in his attempts to avoid talking about the past, he ended up bringing back a discussion people have been trying to avoid. And they are, of course, still trying to avoid it — they want to make this just about the horserace, or about the hypothetical of “if you knew what we know now”.
For that formulation is itself an evasion, as Josh Marshall, Greg Sargent, and Duncan Black point out — each making a slightly different but crucial point.
First, as Josh says, Iraq was not a good faith mistake. Bush and Cheney didn’t sit down with the intelligence community, ask for their best assessment of the situation, and then reluctantly conclude that war was the only option. They decided right at the beginning — literally before the dust of 9/11 had settled — to use a terrorist attack by religious extremists as an excuse to go after a secular regime that, evil as it was, had nothing to do with that attack. To make the case for the splendid little war they expected to fight, they deliberately misled the public, making an essentially fake case about WMD — because chemical weapons, which many believed Saddam had, are nothing like the nukes they implied he was working on — and insinuating the false claim that Saddam was behind 9/11.
Second, as Greg says, even this isn’t hindsight. It was quite clear at the time that the case for war was fake — God knows I thought it was glaringly obvious, and tried to tell people — and fairly obvious as well that the attempt to create a pro-American Iraq after the invasion was likely to be an expensive failure. The question for war supporters shouldn’t be, would you have been a supporter knowing what you know now. It should be, why didn’t you see the obvious back then?
more
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/16/blinkers-and-lies/?_r=0
He's been on a roll lately!
= new reply since forum marked as read
&u&g&m&a&n 
It was obvious then that invading Iraq was insane.
• Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
• Breaking Iraq was sure to strengthen Iran, an insane theocratic regime.
• Breaking Iraq was sure to be a quagmire for US troops because of above.
• Not to mention the cost to the US in deficit and lives.
It was obvious to me then, and I'm sure the WH and Department of State were full of people who knew all this.
So, why did the chicken cross the road? Why did GW go to war against Iraq? I still have no clue.
