« Before John Bolton gets t... | Talking Points Memo Home | Rep John Dingell (D-MI) o... »

11.17.04 -- 6:39PM
By Josh Marshall

In regard to Steve Clemons' quote from Richard Perle noted earlier today, several readers have suggested that what Perle must have meant was that the UN Inspectors -- because of their alleged fecklessness and/or because they had to operate while the regime still existed -- would never find WMD and that our drive to war would thus be thwarted.

That thought occurred to me too. It was a common argument with Perle and other neo-cons in the run-up to war that the inspections process was worthless either because Saddam could too easily bamboozle the inspectors or because even finding evidence of banned weapons would only lead to a renewed game of 'cheat and retreat'.

But when I spoke to Clemons this afternoon and then again this evening, he said that this distinction (i.e., between what inspectors might find before the war and what the US might find after the war) was at least not clear in what Perle said and that he seemed to be speaking more broadly.

The feckless inspector argument is certainly one explanation. But I'm curious to hear more.

Recent Archives

November 29, 2009 - December 5, 2009
November 22, 2009 - November 28, 2009
November 15, 2009 - November 21, 2009
November 8, 2009 - November 14, 2009

TPM News Headlines

Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address