In his May 22 column (“Look to 2011 – not 2003 – for cause of Islamic State takeover in Iraq”), Charles Krauthammer places in its proper perspective “the question incessantly asked of the various presidential candidates” about the invasion of Iraq.

He states: “The question is not just a hypothetical, but an inherently impossible hypothetical.” His reasoning: “No WMD, no hypothetical to answer in the first place.”

To expand on his premise, we would have known that the weapons of mass destruction did not exist.

Therefore, President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney would not have been able to justify their “shock and awe” invasion of Iraq. Bush would not have been able to proclaim the war had been won. (Who can forget the elaborate setting for “mission accomplished”?)

It follows, according to Krauthammer, that Saddam Hussein might still be in power, his dictatorship oppressive but serving to restrain the centuries-old feuds of the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. Despite these tribal disagreements, the “Gulf States’ top leaders” would still be our friends.

No Iraq war means that Krauthammer would not be able to blame President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for “fully squandering” the victory that Bush bequeathed to Obama.


In keeping with Krauthammer’s reasoning, we must accept as fact that the “retrospective hypothetical” began with the outright lies told by George W., Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.

These falsehoods that misled the world in 2003 are solely responsible for our 2015 involvement in a “collapsed” Middle East region. We owe Krauthammer a debt of gratitude for so clearly verifying where the blame for the Iraq disaster really “lies.”

Sam Kamin


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.