They should also be forced to explain why they cling to the "no WMD!" mantra, when in fact coalition forces have found the following since the invasion of Iraq:
- 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
- 1,500 gallons of chemical agents
- Rockets and mortars containing cyclosarin
- Artillery shells loaded with sarin and mustard gas
Next, they should defend their insistence that Saddam's Iraq had nothing to do with al Qaeda or with international terrorism at all.
Consider that both Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal had found protection under Saddam. Then read Deroy Murdocks's National Review article on these and other ties Saddam's regime had to international terrorism, including Al Qaeda. Mr. Murdock is far more learned and more eloquent than I can ever be.
The loonier ones need to also explain how this was a "war for oil" when I'm still paying two bucks a gallon for gas, and not one drop of Iraq's crude oil has found its way to our strategic petroleum reserves. And I don't even want to entertain any explanations of how this was a war for Israel.
The sad, simple fact is this: the anti-war movement is being fueled by an amoral, disingenuous Democratic party that will stop at nothing to win back the White House and regain seats in the House and the Senate, and national security be damned.