The WMD’s, Mr. Bush

“We will find weapons of mass destruction,” drones the Bush administration in an all-too-familiar briefing. It sounds strangely similar to what they’ve been saying since even before UN Resolution 1441. In a war that was justified by nothing else but the existence of these weapons, and has arguably been shaped by the search for them, the administration has done little to validate its dizzying web of arguments. Despite our claims that Saddam possesses endless masses of chemical and biological weapons, including up to 500 tons of nerve and mustard gas, a few gas masks and scattered protective suits do not indicate a whole-scale storage anthrax or botulinum toxin any more than the doubtful satellite images hailing from those far-off days of UN inspections. Although coalition forces bumbled about Iraq in a desperate search for these weapons of certain doom with little to no success, they seemed to have no trouble locating and occupying oil wells. Laying aside the rhetoric of the debate over Saddam’s weapons, a glance at the dubious progression of White House logic should indicate the sheer gall and blatant insincerity of the Bush administration. The 9/11 terrorist attacks scarred the American psyche, creating a sense of anticipation and doom that has yet to dissipate. While the “democracy” in Afghanistan fell apart at the seams, the Bush administration proposed a new war, a new mission. The initial reasoning? Saddam Hussein was, of course, personally involved in 9/11. He is part of the “axis of evil,” and undoubtedly hand in hand with that slimy weasel Osama bin Laden in this new wave of terrorism. Never mind that Saddam is a relatively secular womanizer who has committed many a sacrilegious act. Never mind that he is one of the last people a fundamentalist like bin Laden would associate with. With that dubious and propaganda-driven connection dying quickly from a good dose of a rare thing, the truth, the Bush administration turned elsewhere. When the UN Security Council ratified Resolution 1441, Iraq, complete with horrifying weapons of mass destruction, became the new international threat. After fighting tooth and nail with an unwilling Security Council, the Bush administration decided to abandon diplomacy altogether and go in with a “coalition of the willing,” composed of the U.K. and many other powerful forces, such as that rather obscure village of Oobabalanka somewhere in the vastness of Eastern Europe. So, now that we have waged unilateral war, where did the weapons of mass destruction go? Who’s Osama bin Laden? But no, more indefatigable logic awaited the American public and the world. Saddam is a monster, a cruel dictator who kills his own kin and orders merciless executions at the slightest sign of disobedience. This war is a mission, a “crusade” of liberation and humanitarianism. We, as the U.S., could not have allowed such a despot to remain in power. Operation Iraqi Liber-um-Freedom rolled along and came to a rumbling conclusion, predictably with the US on top and Baghdad in veritable ruin. What now? We have won our war, in regards to military success anyhow, just like Afghanistan, which is absolutely thriving with stability and democracy at the moment. So what does the US, liberator of the Iraqi people propose? Well, American oil companies are contracted to start an immediate monopoly in the rebuilding, with Halliburton, whose CEO of five years has a name suspiciously similar to that of our very own Vice President, and Parsons, an oil giant with military ties, playing starring roles. Numerous tax cuts have created a deficit the size of the Sahara, and this rebuilding process could very well cost up to $20 billion a year. Initial proposal? Of course, since we have “liberated” the Iraqi people, surely they will not mind the generous savior borrowing a few, insignificant resources, right? But, alas, we are too late; that dastardly organization Oil for Food already has their hands in the dough. But, as Colin Powell notes, Syria may also possess weapons of mass destruction–of this we have “high confidence.” This “rogue nation” has but one chance for its leaders to “[make] the right decisions.” Next target, please. The bottom line? A nation that once commanded respect throughout the world for its justice and honesty has now fallen to weak excuses and petty power plays. Some would say that in this time of turmoil, we need to support our government in the name of patriotism, but I’m sure our Founding Fathers would be shaking their heads at the mockery that America has become.