"What effect must it have on a nation if it learns no foreign languages? Probably much the same as that which a total withdrawal from society has upon an individual." --G.C. Lichtenberg
According to this story in the LA Times, the CIA is preparing a report on what WMD capabilities Iraq might have had in 2008 if we had not invaded.
Some folks thought Saddam already had lots of chemical and biological weapons, in quantity and weaponized, and had been six months away from having nuclear weapons back in 1998.
If he already had every kind of WMD imaginable, what would be so special about 2008? Was it that he would finally have enough that he could part with some of them to give to terrorists?
Or do we assume that we knew he didn't have any WMDs in the first place, but that he intended to get them in the near future? In that case, invading Iraq to prevent it from acquiring them could be construed as a good idea, except for the fact that it would mean that virtually all of the Bush administration's statements on the subject before the war were brazen, willful lies and grounds for immediate, unanimous impeachment.
