Are You Safer?
Mr. Bush has described the Iraq war as the central front in the "war on terror," but the chaos there has also created a potential haven for terrorists.
Before the war, the president said that, "A free Iraq can be a source of hope for all the Middle East. Instead of threatening its neighbors and harboring terrorists, Iraq can be an example of progress and prosperity in a region that needs both."
Unfortunately, the peace, love, and prosperity promised by the "cakewalk" crowd hasn't materialized just yet (perhaps it has been shuttled out of the country along with those phantom WMDs!). Indeed, chaos is increasingly the order of the day in Iraq.
According to the NIC report, "Iraq has joined the list of conflicts -- including the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate, and independence movements in Chechnya, Kashmir, Mindanao in the Philippines, and southern Thailand -- that have deepened solidarity among Muslims and helped spread radical Islamic ideology."
Despite the feigned shock and surprise that an "insurgency" has been birthed in Iraq, all of this was predictable. On the eve of war, Pat Buchanan wrote, "a U.S. army in Baghdad will ignite calls for jihad from Morocco to Malaysia." Pat went on to say that, "to democratize, defend and hold Iraq together, U.S. troops will be tied down for decades. Yet, terrorist attacks in liberated Iraq seem as certain as in liberated Afghanistan." (As an aside, thoughtful conservatives abandoned the Republican Party in 2000 to cast a vote for Pat--but the GOP didn't need our 15 votes.)
So, in retropsect, who was right about the war? Buchanan, or the Krauthammer-Perle-Kristol-Frum-Adelman-Goldberg-Wolfowitz-Feith echo chamber?