post-war post

Andrew Sullivan posts an interesting reply on his blog to Christopher Hitchens’ non-mea culpa at slate.com. When I first read Mr. Hitchens’ post on Monday I was uncomfortable with most of the rearview mirror speculation he used when determining exactly which train station platform the supporters of the war should have disembarked from their ride; he determined there were none – apparently it was a one-way ticket to this destiny. I never thought the question was whether or not there were “actual or latent” WMD programs. I wasn’t one to debate the quality of the intelligence, and certainly not one to sit on my couch and parse anything about the details of intrigue swirling in the White House. What I wanted to decide was whether or not I was willing to follow this president into a war of choice – and I wasn’t: good intelligence or not. I had zero faith in this administration. It was hard to believe that the jingoistic remnants of September 11th were clouding our view of what the President was asking of the country. In many ways what bothered me then is what bothers Mr. Sullivan now:

The real question is: if we knew then what we know now about the caliber, ethics, competence and integrity of the president and his aides, would we have entrusted them to wage this war?

If the actual, unrigged intelligence data had been presented at the UN, if the statements of president, vice-president, defense secretary et al had been carefully parsed to ensure that we knew exactly the knowable risks of action and of inaction, then a ramped-up inspections regime might well have been preferable to war.

Would we have trusted their presentation of pre-war intelligence? And the answer to that, I venture to guess for my friend as well, is: no. If we had known that war meant sending Iraq into a vortex of uncontrollable violence…

Yes, I am glad Saddam is gone. Yes, I believe my own intentions before the war were honorable, if mistaken. Yes, I believe Hitch's were as well - and those of many others. But we were fools not to see the true nature of the people we were trusting; and too enraptured by our own sense of righteousness to realize that we could have been wrong. And wrong we were.

As for Mr. Hitchens’ assertion that some of us feel a need to crow for vindication for our opinions before war; I have no such need. All I ever wanted was for everyone to open their eyes and decide the degree of trust they held in this Administration. There’s an interesting opening essay in one of Hitchins’ books that speaks of England and Churchill in WWII – the blind admiration for a leader that may or may not have been warranted. I’ll go back and read that one tonight.

Peace.

T.