Column: No WMD? So What?

Tim Eggerding

Tim Eggerding

By Chuck Prochaska

How short the American memory is. It was not that long ago when we collectively mourned 3,000 dead Americans.

It was not that long ago when anti-American sentiment abroad was something to be despised and not feared.

It was not that long ago when most of us wanted Saddam Hussein disarmed, dethroned and dishonored as the tyrant that he was, not defended.

Today, for true Americans, those emotions live on.

On my way back to school last week, I listened in my car for two hours to the liberal media blowing raspberries at Americans who supported the war, alerting us to the officially “failed” search for weapons of mass destruction, one of the president’s central justifications for the war. However, note that I say central justification; not the only justification and not an essential justification.

True, there were many other nations that posed a threat to the United States including North Korea and Iran. But Iraq had the least to lose politically and economically by engaging the United States in an international distance-urinating challenge.

The war in Iraq was fought to remove a brutal dictator who had the desire and ability to attack the United States and its allies at whim, without notice and to fund future al-Qaida attacks against our nation. Period.

The fact that Saddam had moved and destroyed all of his WMDs in time to evade U.N. weapons inspectors and U.S. troops should not award him the clearance of international law or the sympathy of freedom-loving Americans. The war in Iraq was a just war that should have been fought regardless of the status of Saddam’s WMD program.

A popular liberal argument against the war in Iraq is to claim that the only reason we went to war was to disarm Saddam of WMDs and not because he was an evil dictator who oppressed his own people. This, however, is not true. Take, for instance, President Bush’s speech declaring war on Iraq on March 17, 2003. “In a free Iraq, there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture chambers and rape rooms. The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near.” This was a clear statement justifying a war to remove a hateful despot, with no mention of WMDs. Mission accomplished.

However, Saddam had a history of developing WMDs and would not disclose his involvement in illegal programs to the United Nations. If he would have said, “No, really guys, come check it out – I’m clean” and the inspectors were allowed to do their job, I wouldn’t be writing this column.

He had used WMDs before, which means he had the will and capacity to deliver them again. Saddam had executed over 200,000 Iraqis using chemical weapons shortly before the 1991 Gulf War. Imagine if a single Saddam-funded dirty bomb was detonated in the United States. It’s a shame how liberals love to sacrifice dead Americans for self-incriminating Muslim terrorists.

It really doesn’t matter that WMDs were not found in Iraq. Obviously, Saddam was too smart to leave them lying around in a nation about to be taken over by U.S. troops. Several reports issued shortly after the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom disclose the location of assorted WMDs with Iraq’s name on them – literally – in countries like Syria and Lebanon. If anything, these reports, hidden by the liberal media, are evidence to advance the war on terror elsewhere in the Middle East.

The fact that WMDs were not found in Iraq is a testament to American intelligence and resolve. In the midst of a global uprising against American values, we were diligent enough to stop the ringleader before he could get started again. May we always have the courage to defend our great nation against Islamic terrorists and those who support their cause – at whatever cost.

Chuck Prochaska is a sophomore in LAS. His column runs on Tuesdays. He can be reached at [email protected]