NYT editorializes To have the sober conversation about the war in Iraq that America badly needs, it is vital to acknowledge three facts:
Translation: NYT still does not like the Iraq War, and figures if it screams it's "FACTS" loud enough and often enough, maybe someone will believe them.
- The war has nothing to do with Sept. 11. Saddam Hussein was a sworn enemy of Washington, but there was no Iraq-Qaeda axis,
Except for the Ansa Al Islam camp in the north, the known terrorists that were allowed to live in Baghdad, and possibly other connections.no connection between Saddam Hussein and the terrorist attacks on the United States....
And terrorists are entering Iraq from Saudia Arabia, Syria, and possibly Iran, and they are dying there, rather than in the United States.
The plan seems to be going fine to me. Liberals said we would never find Saddam. We did. They said we would never be able to turn over soverignity to Iraqis. We did. They said Iraqis would never be able to hold a democratic election. They did. They said they would never be able to form a Government. They did. They said they would never be able to write a constitution. It is being written right now, with participation from Kurds, Shias, and Sunnis.Americans cannot judge for themselves because the administration has decided to make the information secret. Senator John McCain spoke for us when he expressed his disbelief at this news. "I think the American people need to know," he said. "They are the ones who are paying for this conflict."