I just love this. Buried after a rather tongue-in-cheek start, The Guardian today quoted Donald Rumsfeld regarding the lack of any weapons of mass destruction found thus far in Iraq.
In an effort to explain why no chemical or biological weapons had been found in Iraq, the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said yesterday the regime may have destroyed them before the war.
Like. They. Were. Supposed. To.
Speaking to the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations thinktank, he [Rumsfeld - Sid.] said the speed of U.S. advance may have caught Iraq by surprise, but added: "It is also possible that they decided that they would destroy them prior to a conflict."
So, the reason we're not finding any WMDs is because they were destroyed. Oh, yes, I love it. We invade another nation, justifying the action in part with claims that they
1. have WMDs that might be used against us!
2. refuse to hand over information on these alleged WMDs that they are supposed to destroy/to have destroyed that might be used against us! In violation of UN directives!
But in the shortest conflict in the history of humankind (with the exception of Cain v. Abel, sudden death in less than three rounds), Iraq had time to "decide" to destroy all those pesky weapons.
Oh, oh, yes. It all makes sense if you have the IQ of head cheese.
No comments:
Post a Comment