Administration Should Be Accountable on Iraq

Given that so much we planned for in Iraq didn’t happen (no weapons of mass destruction found versus Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s assertion in March that Iraq had WMD and “we know where they are”; no biological or chemical attacks on U.S. soldiers; no credible, significant links to Al Qaeda; no massive oil field fires; no Scud attacks on Israel; no humanitarian crisis; no preemptive wipeout of Saddam Hussein; no in-place infrastructure to run the country after the war; no resounding welcome for the U.S. occupation), why isn’t there a recognition of our intelligence failure and a louder cry for a complete accounting of our intelligence failure from both within and outside the administration? The intelligence issue should be much broader and deeper than the 16 words in the State of the Union speech.

Charles Finch

Huntington Beach

*

Let’s see now, members of Al Qaeda from Saudi Arabia attack the World Trade Center, so we attack Iraq. Osama bin Laden is admittedly the instigator of the attack, but we are actively looking for Hussein. North Korea is building nuclear weapons and has long-range missiles, so we attack Iraq. Iraqi citizens want the U.S. to leave, so we stay. Liberia wants us to come, so we don’t. Is it me or is it our foreign policy that is so loopy?

Tom Hamman

Huntington Beach

*

The Bush administration’s search for Bin Laden is beginning to look as credible as O.J. Simpson’s search for the real killers of his former wife and her friend. As President Bush heads off for vacation, American troops remain on the job at the price of $1 billion a week and a body a day.

Joseph A. Myers

Los Angeles