I haven't blogged much about the upcoming war on Iraq, in large part because in spite of the fact that I dread the fact that my country might purposely start a war (or, at least, acknowledging same), I genuinely believe Iraq is a very real threat. The fact that North Korea is a similar threat, or that Saudi Arabia is a stronger supporter of terrorism, or that such a war is supported largely by a collection of chickenhawks both inside and outside the Administration, is interesting, but do not justify doing nothing about Saddam Hussein. If Clinton was still President, or if the will of the people had not been thwarted by the Supreme Court, I would have no difficulty supporting a preemptive war to "disarm" Saddam.

Nevertheless, I have great difficulty mustering any enthusiasm for the Administration's goals in this instance. As this typically excellent column by Paul Krugman makes clear, the shifting rationales and slippery reasoning used by W. and the likudniks to manuever the international community into a war have backfired terribly. It's not just "old Europe", to use the term which has earned our Defense Secretary such ridicule; it's countries like Russia and Mexico, that rely a great deal on American aid and trade, where we are having difficulty mustering support. The fact of the matter is, the only countries that support our plans are those countries that have never had a tradition of independence in their foreign policies.

What I guess I'm saying is, I don't like being lied to. I didn't like it when Clinton denied having sexual relations with "that woman", even though it wasn't any of my business; he should have just offered a pithy "no comment" and left it at that. Lying debases democracy, and makes the ability to freely choose between candidates and policy impossible. But Clinton was just lying about his personal life, and as David Brock so accurately wrote, the people who pursued the charges were infinitely more malevolent. In the end, the only people who were really hurt were the members of his family.

Bush, and the rest of his Administration, lie about policy. And that hurts all of us. We are now being told (for example, here and here) that because Bush has backed us into a corner with his stupid games, we might have to go to war now or risk losing face, a setback that would encourage Saddam, and other despots, to develop nukes of their own. I look at Iraq, and see an oppressed people, and a dictator who brutalizes them, and a region that is destablized by his presence. There are plenty of good reasons to fight, but all I see is a President who is more interested in starting a war to bolster his reelection chances, or to get cheap oil for his backers, or to divert attention from an economic mess he created. Or all three. I don't trust him, so I can't give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.