New York Times Retells WMD Blame Bush Story

0
Share

WMDs were found in Iraq according to a New York Times ‘bombshell’ report but it was kept secret by George Bush for political reasons. Seventeen soldiers were injured. Oh, and, in case you didn’t get the message, it’s Bush’s fault.

It’s a great distraction when President Obola needs it most.

We have heard there were WMDs in Iraq many times since the invasion. Why is it a story now?

Could it be a case of the old “look over there at the bright, shiny object”?

The Times reported that U.S. Troops found 5,000 chemical weapons, mostly mustard agents in Iraq. A total of 17 troops were injured handling them, which is what they really want you to know.

The Times contends that the information was kept secret because it didn’t meet George Bush’s basis for going to war since they were built in the 1980’s and 5 out of 6 of the weapons were based on U. S. designs.

The Times did admit that another reason for not reporting it was the soldiers were loathe to do the extra hours of paper work involved in recording the information.

The Times also admitted that the weapons were found up until 2011, long after President Obama took office. Why didn’t Mr. Obama leak it during one of his endless assaults on George Bush if it was such a scandal?

Chemical weapons caches were found as recently as this year when ISIS boasted of taking over one such cache as reported by The Atlantic in June.

Why is the Times releasing the story three weeks before the election?

Whether Bush kept it secret is hard to say and he won’t tell us. [Reports now indicate that Karl Rove convinced George Bush to keep it secret. If that is true, that’s infuriating.]

That isn’t what is key to this story really.

The possible underlying reasons for the story are what matters.

For one thing, it provides a distraction from Obama’s multiple failures and constant lies about ISIS, Ebola, the economy et al.

For another, it also serves to diminish Obama’s lies – Bush lied too you see.

Finally, its the old blame Bush and the Republicans for our problems in the world.

Though indirect, it’s a pre-election attack on Republicans.

The stories about the finding of WMDs have been coming out for years but they didn’t bother to print the story until now.

The story has the added effect of suggesting – indirectly – that there is a pointlessness to going to war – after all, look at how Iraq turned out. They want us to think that as ISIS rages through the Middle East and it becomes more-and-more apparent Mr. Obama plans to do nothing about it.

Share