It really bothers me how the history of the US's involvement in Iraq has been falsified. A whole lot of people are lying who say George Bush was lying. As usual, with the devil's work; what they are saying is the very opposite of the truth.
First, everyone thought Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Not just Bush. Second, they may well have been right; where did Assad's chemical weapons come from? Why does no one ask? Third, the US did not invade because Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. It was because he had repeatedly violated the ceasefire. Fourth, nobody notices that Saddam, besides invading two neighbouring countries, was killing his own people. He had already killed an estimated million. How many more would have died if Bush had not gone in? Does it not matter, since they were Iraqis? Fifth, Bush won the war. By 2008, when Bush left office, Iraq was doing fine. The current destabilization, contrary to what many are saying, is not Bush's doing, or the fault of intervening in Iraq. It is Obama's baby, and the predictable result of pulling out all troops. Throwing away everything that the US military had accomplished.
What really burns me is that all these people who supported the war and then opposed the surge, and then pulled all the troops, are blaming Bush. That is stomach-turningly dishonest.
Victor Davis Hanson remembers.