Times-Union Managing Editor

The issue of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction is troubling to me.

Seems to me that any way you look at it, it's not good.

If there really were no big bombs in Iraq to begin with, how in the world did we get it so wrong?

And if there were big bombs in Iraq to begin with, where are they now? Spirited away into the hand of some other rogue wacko?

Not many positives there.

I tend to believe that we got it wrong. I think Saddam probably exaggerated his level of big bomb ownership. Or, perhaps his big bomb scientists told Saddam he had big bombs and he never really checked it out for himself.

I mean, if Saddam told you to produce a big bomb, I'd guess you'd probably either produce one or tell him you did. Especially if you wanted to keep your head attached to your shoulders.

Nonetheless, the fact that no big bombs were found in Iraq so far really has the Democrats chomping at the bit.

One of my liberal friends thinks W and the CIA knew all along that there were no big bombs and that it was a just a lie so they could go to war with Iraq. The intelligence agencies from Russia, Germany, Britain, et. al., were part of the conspiracy, you see.

That's a bit much, but it's fun to listen to what more even-keeled liberals like John Kerry are saying.

He was blathering on in his very presidential voice on CBS' "Face the Nation."

He wants W and Vice President Dick Cheney to be "held accountable."

"They ought to be held accountable for using the weapons of mass destruction argument," Kerry said. "Dick Cheney and others in the administration misled the American people with respect to the true status of the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

Kerry said he didn't know if W was personally involved in the big bomb intelligence failure, but that an investigation could sort that out.

On Fox News, Kerry expressed concern that the W administration purposely lied to us to justify the war.

"It confirms what I have said for a long period of time, that we were misled - misled not only in the intelligence, but misled in the way that the president took us to war," Kerry expressed. "I think there's been an enormous amount of exaggeration, stretching, deception."

Lots of Democrats these days are being pretty tough on those big bomb claims.

But, my, how times change in the world of politics. One needs to look no further than snopes.com to see just how much.

Following are quotes from prominent Democrats regarding big bombs in Iraq. Granted, the quotes are not in context and were parts of larger statements, but you certainly don't get the sense that anyone was questioning the accuracy of our big bomb intelligence.

We'll start with a couple from the honorable Sen. Kerry himself. (Note the dates.)

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, Mass.), Oct. 9, 2002.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real. ..."

- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, Mass.), Jan. 23. 2003.

So isn't Kerry exaggerating, stretching and deceiving, too? And what about the rest of the prominent Demos:

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

-President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

-Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, Calif.), Dec. 16, 1998.

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

- Letter to President Bush, signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, Fla.), and others, Dec 5, 2001.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." ... "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, Mass.), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last U.N. weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons. ..."

- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, W.V.), Oct. 3, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, W.V.), Oct 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, N.Y.), Oct 10, 2002.

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."

- Sen. Bob Graham (D, Fla.), Dec. 8, 2002.

OK, that's enough. You get the picture. See all those phrases like "compelling evidence," "unmistakable evidence," "we know" and "there is no doubt."

Everybody - and I do mean everybody - in politics thought Saddam had big bombs dating back to the Clinton administration. So if all the Democrats believed Iraq had big bombs, how can they now blame W for believing exactly the same thing?

It reminds me of a mom and dad deciding whether to let junior use the car. Sure, it's OK, they decide together.

Then, when the kid scrapes the side of the car backing out of the garage, Dad yells at Mom, "What were you thinking!? I told you not to let him use that car!"

We absolutely need to figure out where we went wrong with the big bomb intelligence, but all the partisan finger-pointing and posturing is really pretty pointless and stupid. [[In-content Ad]]