In One Eye

Sunday, June 08, 2003
 
Some Reaganite named Gary Schmidt opines in this morning's LA Times:
With inspections coming, Hussein might have decided that it would be best to get rid of existing illicit weapon stocks; allow the inspectors (and the world) to tire of finding little or nothing; see them leave; and then reconstitute his arsenal by means of his still extant but covert production capabilities. He couldn't admit that he had destroyed them because he knew, from experience, that it would never be so simple. Once he had admitted to having these stocks, inspectors would have asked about the underlying programs that produced them — a string Hussein couldn't allow to be pulled if he was to retain his capacity to build weapons.

Or, if Hussein destroyed the stocks in the weeks leading up to the war, he may have done so in the belief that conflict was likely and that if he used chemical or biological weapons against coalition forces, it would only solidify U.S. determination to take his regime down.
More conjecture on the part of the paternalists.

Ultimately, in what must be the most ironic line of the morning, Schmidt advises that "patience is required."

In his struggle to justify a war that has no justification, Schmidt doesn't consider that perhaps the hawks in the Executive Branch might have heeded this advice in their rush to war.