Make way for the war apologists

It was only a matter of time, I suppose. As the number of days accumulate since the liberation, and WMD remain conspicuous by their absence, people are starting to shift uncomfortably in their seats.

Alternative justifications are now emerging such as the report in today’s Observer (Saddam ‘held talks on alliance with al-Qaeda’) and the piece in the New York Times by Thomas L. Friedman (The meaning of a skull). In his characteristic straight-talking style, Friedman cuts to the chase and basically mounts an argument stating that it doesn’t matter if there aren’t any WMD because Saddam was a bad guy and the world is better off without him. With Saddam’s human rights record, few are likely to argue with Friedman. However, I can’t help thinking that he’s being a tad optimistic when he concludes that the challenge for Bush is to ‘not take the good thing he has done and cast it in an ideological framework that will make people resent it – at home and abroad’. That particular horse bolted from the stable door a long time ago me thinks.