(no subject)
Feb. 10th, 2004 11:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
stevenehrbar"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Former Vice-President Al Gore, September 23, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 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..."
Senator Robert Byrd (D, WV), October 3, 2002.
"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 arssenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Senator John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 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."
Senator Hillary Clinton (D, NY), October 10, 2002
Former Vice-President Al Gore, September 23, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 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..."
Senator Robert Byrd (D, WV), October 3, 2002.
"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 arssenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Senator John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 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."
Senator Hillary Clinton (D, NY), October 10, 2002
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-02-11 06:40 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-11 09:35 am (UTC)"Why Bush Being Wrong on WMDs Won't Matter in November"
---
Full explanation:
As a political matter, being wrong only hurts when the opposition was right. If both sides were wrong, it is a sufficient defense to say "my opponent thought the same thing as I did". That defuses it, at least as far as the average undecided voter cares. (Arguments about why such a casual dismissal is wrong are pointless, because the average undecided voter isn't going to be listening anymore. If they were the type to pay more attention, they'd be in the category of people who already have an opinion.)
So at this point, given those quotes, the WMD issue is as salient as Lewinsky was in '96; the partisans (or at least a subset of them) on one side care passionately about it, but it isn't going to change any votes. To win, the Democratic Party/Kerry campaign is going to have to come up with something else.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-11 08:15 pm (UTC)The Democrats could say, "Yes, we were mistaken too, but the administration's treatment of the issue was faulty even given the limitations of the information available to them." They won't, of course - and the average voter would lose track of the shades of distinction about five words in - but it would still be a valid point for those of us who are paying attention.