Magazine article Mother Jones

Editor's Note

Magazine article Mother Jones

Editor's Note

Article excerpt

Last February, as President Bush's relentless push for war in Iraq reached its peak, I was having dinner with a friend, a best-selling author long active in progressive causes, when the talk inevitably turned to the impending conflict. "Even these guys," he said, referring to the administration, "wouldn't be so brazen as to just go ahead with all this, unless they knew a lot more than they're saying publicly. There must be things they just can't say for security reasons." I was appalled to hear my friend trotting out one of the most dangerous, discredited canards of the Vietnam era, but for a brief moment I wondered if he might be right.

Yet now, as the truth begins to emerge, the full extent of the painful parallels to Vietnam are becoming clear. For not only are U.S. soldiers bogged down in the proverbial quagmire, but the Bush administration's rationale for war is being exposed as a shameful fraud. As we now know, the administration had no additional evidence that might have justified invading Iraq, and the case they presented to the world was filled with bogus information and outright lies. Remember the aluminum tubes that Iraq planned to use to enrich uranium for nuclear warheads? Turns out that they were for making rocket casings, as the Iraqis had claimed, and were, in the words of a top official of the U.S.-led inspections team, "innocuous." Remember the contention that Iraq had sought uranium from an African nation (later identified as Niger), a charge that made its way into the president's 2003 State of the Union address? …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.