George W. Bush lied us into war, Donald Trump said. Bush told us there were weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq when he knew there weren’t any, he said.
Let’s stipulate that Trump is right (he’s not, but let’s stipulate it). Do you know who else believed that Iraq was developing WMDs?
In a book that the Donald wrote back in 2000, entitled The America We Deserve, Trump raised some red flags about Iraq’s nuclear capabilities. He also wrote that the best course of action, if the United States decided to go to war against Iraq, was to “carry the mission to its conclusion.”
Behold, the Trumpster in his own words:
Consider Iraq. After each pounding from U.S . warplanes, Iraq has dusted itself off and gone right back to work developing a nuclear arsenal. Six years of tough talk and U.S. fireworks in Baghdad have done little to slow Iraq’s crash program to become a nuclear power. They’ve got missiles capable of flying nine hundred kilometers—more than enough to reach Tel Aviv. They’ve got enriched uranium. All they need is the material for nuclear fission to complete the job, and, according to the Rumsfeld report, we don’t even know for sure if they’ve laid their hands on that yet. That’s what our last aerial assault on Iraq in 1999 was about. Saddam Hussein wouldn’t let UN weapons inspectors examine certain sites where that material might be stored. The result when our bombing was over? We still don’t know what Iraq is up to or whether it has the material to build nuclear weapons. I’m no warmonger. But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don’t, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us.