Wednesday, July 09, 2003

Our ever-changing stories

Looks like even Pravd -- WaPo's Terry Neal is beginning to get it:

So the administration made national security its strongest case for launching an exceedingly rare, historically discouraged, internationally frowned-upon preemptive war.

Fast forward to the present: The administration that had 100 percent certainty that there were weapons of mass destruction has zero percent certainty as to where they are now. The White House and the president's defenders have reverted to their fall-back humanitarian position -- that the removal of Hussein was justification enough for the war.

Whatever the case, the argument that it is a good thing that Hussein is gone and the argument that the Bush administration may have lied to or misled the public on the issue of weapons of mass destruction are not mutually exclusive. Both could be true. And if they are, the former fact won't exonerate the president if the latter is true as well.

So, what did he know and when did he know it?

And did our soldiers know they were going to war for a "fallback position"?