These same folks are also gleeful that, so far, the U.S.A. has not found significant evidence of weapons of mass destruction in liberated Iraq.

Sad, isn’t it, that such high-ranking elected officials enjoy scoring political points at the expense of our country.

Now we are told constantly by the Liberal media drumbeat–and the Liberal "journal- ists" are good at drumbeats–that somehow Operation Iraqi Freedom was for naught, since no evidence has been found.

To prove their case, one media pundit even went to the extent of slightly altering a quote by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to make it look as if the issue of WMD was one giant ruse by the Bush administration.

Any honest appraisal of the cause of this war would show that WMDs were a legiti- mate, priority item.

The war was not fought because we knew for sure that Saddam Hussein had nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons.

The war took place precisely because we did not know for sure what this maniac was up to.

We knew that, based on his previous activities (using chemical weapons against the Kurds), his own wild statements against the West and the statements of many defec- tors (including his chief nuclear bomb maker), Saddam posed a tremendous threat to the United States of America and its allies.

Saddam made his intent clear: If he did obtain such weapons, he would likely use them.

But again, we did not attack Iraq because he was developing these weapons. We at- tacked Iraq because he did not allow us to verify this fact. It is a subtle but important distinction.

Saddam flouted one UN resolution after another for well over a decade.

Had he given the UN inspectors unfettered access, and all had been kosher, he would have been free to do as he pleased.

But Saddam wouldn’t go for that.

This situation could be compared to evidence of a man illegally building a bomb in his own home.

Let us suppose that the police are informed of this development by the man’s neigh- bors, family, and friends. Some have even seen bomb-making equipment and heard this man’s threat to use the bomb.

When the police ask the man to voluntarily agree to a search, the man refuses.

When the police get a legal search warrant and the man refuses to accede to the court order, the police are justified in breaking down his door. If he violently resists, they can shoot him.

If, hypothetically, the police were to do just that and ended up killing the man to con- duct the search–and then found no bomb or evidence of the bomb in the house–are they at fault?

Most reasonable people, and certainly the man’s neighbors, would agree that a) the police did the right thing in searching for the bomb-making equipment; b) unfortu- nately, the man paid a price for not agreeing to the court order; and c) the man prob- ably had likely hid the bomb-making material after so many people had testified to its existence.

Similarly, Saddam could have saved himself by agreeing to wishes of the international community and to agreements his own government had signed.

Instead, Saddam forwent an estimated $100 billion in oil revenues that he lost, due to UN sanctions–precisely because he did not allow UN inspectors unfettered access.

While it is certainly fair for critics of President Bush to question his strategy in deal- ing with Saddam, it is unfair for them to question the justness of his cause or his mo- tives.

Whether or not WMDs are found, President Bush has greatly reduced the potential threat of such weapons, not to mention other serious threats Iraq posed, including helping terrorist nations.

Democrats, so intent on capitalizing politically on the “lack of evidence” of WMDs, will never credit President Bush for his courageous stand.

This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics, civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.

POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS

POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE

Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.

Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs, International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests, Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy

INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

---

THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA

An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis

Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor

Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic, Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues

Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity