In this editorial they defend Bush's for invading Iraq once again even though we now know that Sadaam was no threat at all.
The editorial says:
"Because Mr. Bush chose to act, we know what capabilities Iraq did -- and did not -- possess, and we've learned how difficult it is to occupy and attempt to reconstruct that country. What can't be known is what would have happened had Mr. Bush chosen not to invade. Here the new report suggests some answers. Saddam Hussein, it says, was focused on ending international sanctions, which were crumbling before the crisis began. Had he succeeded, he would have resumed production of chemical weapons and probably a nuclear program as well. Mr. Kerry suggested recently that Saddam Hussein's regime would have collapsed under the inspectors' pressure. That is one possibility; another is that it would have reemerged as a significant power in the Middle East, and as a de facto or real ally of the Islamic extremist forces with which the United States is at war."
WHEN WILL THE WP STOP WHORING FOR BUSH? HOW MANY AMERICANS HAVE TO DIE UNTIL THEY STOP THIS BULLSHIT?
BY THE WAY WP.....MANY IN THE GOVT. ALREADY KNEW THAT SADAAM WAS NO THREAT BEFORE THE FUCKING INVASION....FUCK YOU WP!
I NOW BELIEVE THAT THE WP WILL ENDORSE BUSH!
Read the rest of the edotorial here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13433-2004Oct6.html