I’ve been wanting to reply to this post by Rich Casebolt for quite some time. He puts out the same general reasoning that others have shown in shooting down the urgency of the Downing Street Memo and what it represents.
To put it simply, he bases his entire opinion on the fact that Saddam was bad, we all knew he was bad, thus anything Bush and Blair did to confront and depose him was good.
This is far too simplistic… and frankly it’s an insult to the notion of the Rule of Law and Civilized society.
I’ve heard this same justification over and over in so many different ways. To paraphrase one of many…
“We must not judge the act, or the outcome, but rather the intent.”
I call BS on that.
Far too many things have gone wrong in spite of “good intentions”. In a court of law, “good intentions” are basically what seperate Manslaughter from Murder.
However… one point that Rich and those who share his opinion continue to ignore and gloss over is that Manslaughter is still a crime.
While Rich goes into great detail listing all the horrendous crimes and threatening behaviour of Saddam and his crew, he ignores the fact that was Bush did was a crime as well. It may not have been as serious. It may not have been as bloody (arguably). It may not have been as obvious. But a crime it was.
When will the “right” call a spade a spade?