Hey Kevin,
After my response to you it dawned on me that you thought I was making reference to Bush and not Berger. These long threads can be confusing, and, of course, you can't read the "tone" of someone's post unless that person has mastered all of those goofy alphanumeric face symbols, for example, :). And I can't even get that one right.
You offer a lot of questions. As to what if Saddam had the WMDs and used them. Again, we're talking non-nuclear WMDs because I already specified that I was open to an invasion if evidence clearly indicated he was close to acquiring nuclear weapons. My feeling was that Saddam would not have used non-nuclear WMDs against us A) because he didn't have the means to successfully deliver them (those no-fly zones and inspections were working pretty well), and even if he had them, B) given our justified, and, successful invasion of Afghanistan (at least at the time it was successful, things have changed due to the Iraq debacle), I think he would have been dissuaded from such an action that most assuredly would have prompted an overwhelming response by us.
As to North Korea and Iran, well, Iraq has changed both situations. Iraq distracted us from North Korea, and, given that they have successfully tested a nuclear device, the cat's out of the bag. I can't see them giving up their only leverage. I have no answer for this. I just don't see China being able to convince NK to cease their program.
Similarly, the situation in Iraq distracted us from Iran, and, given their power and influence in Iraq, any attack on their facilities will prompt a massive retaliation against our troops. If we can safeguard our troops (pull them out), and pinpoint the bulk of Iran's nuclear facilities, then I'm happy to consider ways to destroy or negotiate the removal of them. I am however concerned that the politicization of intelligence under Bush will adversely affect this decision.
Kevin, as one of the few overtly Christian members of the DBIS, I would like your opinion on a few of Bush's remarks. Bob Woodward mentioned on 60 Minutes that Bush said he didn't consult his father prior to the invasion of Iraq because he had consulted a higher father (I'm paraphrasing). I take it that Bush meant that he prayed to God and received guidance, a sign, something, that the invasion was divinely approved. Or he at least didn't get a vibe that it was not the right thing to do. Similarly, when Bush met Vladamir Putin, he felt he could see Putin's soul in his eyes (again I paraphrase). Given what we have subsequently seen regarding our failure in Iraq, and Putin's authoritarian rule, what do you make of Bush's comments? Did you find them troubling initially? Now, a few years down the road, what do you think? I am in now way pinning Bush's odd ramblings on you or other Christians but to me, these were enormous red flags that the man was not in touch with reality. For the life of me, I don't know why more Americans didn't express concerns. Perhaps they were comforted by Bush's remarks. If so, I find that profoundly disturbing.
Many thanks.
Peter T.
