avocado8

Does That Mean Bush Invaded Iraq To Give WMD to Terrorists?

That was my husband's question when we started talking about the shocking story of missing explosives in Iraq, and wondering whether the Bush administration would characterize the explosives as evidence that Saddam was reviving his nuclear weapons program.

Interestingly, the White House's response to the theft seemed to go in the other direction:

White House spokesman Scott McClellan played down the threat posed by explosives missing from the Al Qaqaa military installation. He said there was no threat of nuclear proliferation, and preferred to concentrate on weapons destroyed, not those lost.

"We have destroyed more than 243,000 munitions," he said. "We've secured another nearly 163,000 that will be destroyed."

But not these ones, apparently. I was pleasantly surprised to hear the Kerry campaign (via Joe Lockhart) attack the Bush administration on this issue immediately and coherently:

"The Bush administration knew where this stockpile was, but took no action to secure the site. They were urgently and specifically informed that terrorists could be helping themselves to the most dangerous explosives bonanza in history, but nothing was done to prevent it from happening," he said.

"This material was monitored and controlled by U.N. inspectors before the invasion of Iraq. Thanks to the stunning incompetence of the Bush administration, we now have no idea where it is," Lockhart said. He demanded the White House explain "why they failed to safeguard these explosives and keep them out of the hands of our enemies."