David Kay's revelations will not be a "crushing blow" to the "right," as John Hieger argues. "They" will still hold onto the belief that WMDs exist somewhere, and/or that Saddam still posed an imminent threat to the U.S. in other ways, and will question the motives and knowledge of Kay himself. And of course, there's the humanitarian reasons for the Iraq war.
The real question is whether our president acted appropriately in promoting and pushing for war (usually a last, costly option) when we apparently had the time to explore other options and at least make better plans for the aftermath.
To know this, we must ask what did the president really know and when did he know it? Why, when his evidence continually was proven false or exaggerated, did he actively seek new reasons for war rather then reconsidering the need or urgency? Was he truly acting as the nation's representative, or fulfilling an ideological agenda?
Unfortunately, such important questions tend to get blown up and personalized into battles over whether the entire Republican Party or conservative movement that Bush supposedly represents is right or wrong, good or evil. True, it may be argued that they are "wrong" to support Bush without question, given the results of his actions and policies.
But by placing people in a position where to admit that Bush is wrong is to somehow condemn themselves hardly gives the "right" motivation to even consider changing their minds. I myself frequently attack what I see as Bush's many faults and crimes. But I recognize the faults of the Democrats as well, and the need to be, well, fair and balanced. I don't always succeed, but I see that trying is necessary.
Otherwise, both sides are too busy being defensive to consider the greater merits of our counterpart's opinions and arguments. Yes, Kay's report validates what those on the left, UN weapons inspectors and many people around the world have argued since before the war. But that does not mean Republicans, conservatives, or the right are wrong or evil. It means that, possibly, Bush, a single individual, is not doing his job the way he should.
But as long as admitting that is to somehow give points to the opposite team, to imply that the left is somehow better than the right, or that making a mistake or being deceived somehow makes us lesser people, it is not likely to be admitted by Bush supporters any time soon.
And as long as the left attacks the right rather than presenting valid questions or facts for the right to consider, the right will consider the left as enemies rather than considering the possibilities.
Written by Randy Henderson, a regular contributor to NEXT
Respond to this posting
Back to top