OH WHERE, OH WHERE HAVE MY WMDs GONE...
...oh where oh where can they be?

The search for weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq continues. So far, the occupation forces haven't really found any.

Don't forget, WMDs were the main reason we went into Iraq... at least according to the administration's rhetoric. Sure, they belatedly threw in the smokescreen about Saddam's phantom links with al-Qaeda and the great ruse about us liberating the Iraqi people and the time-honored American tradition of "regime change" abroad. But the overwhelming majority of the pro-war people support the effort based on the premise that Saddam had WMDs and this represented a threat to us.

Remember the president's own words said that Saddam and his WMDs might not be a threat to us now, but he might be a threat to us in one or five years and we shouldn't wait. That threat was so dangerous, so compelling that we needed to destroy the international order that we'd been instrumental in patiently crafting over the last half century so that we might get rid of the WMDs and Saddam.

It's fair to say that most Americans would've opposed an invasion simply to "liberate" the Iraqis or overthrow Saddam. Links between Saddam and al-Qaeda were so far-fetched even the CIA didn't believe them. Americans supported the war only because the president and his team scared the public into believing that Saddam's alleged WMDs were a clear danger to America. That was the deal.

So where are the WMDs? Administration people are saying it really doesn't matter if we find the WMDs, so long as Saddam's gone. Suddenly, there tuned has changed. I've already pointed out the irony of the Americans adopting the position "we need more time to find the WMDs." I've had one friend who's gone so far as to say that "If they find WMDs, Bush is a hero. If not, he should be impeached."

Frankly, I think it doesn't matter. I think the course of events already proven the hollowness of the administration's claims about the danger Saddam posed to Americans.

Let me examine the three possible scenarios...

a) Saddam didn't had WMDs
b) He used to have WMDs before but sanctions made them impossible to maintain or made them useless
c) He had effective WMDs but decided not to use them

In case a), then the administration's case for war was most obviously based on a sham.

Case c) is almost impossible to believe. The idea that he would hold back for some inexplicable reason, against the evil Americans, is mind boggling. I've heard it advanced that he didn't use them so as to embarass Bush. One thing has been clear during his reign, Saddam will do anything, ANYTHING, absolutely anything to maintain himself in power. The only thing he cares more about than hating Bush is preserving his own power. He's a selfish dictator first, not a suicidal ideologue.

Case b) is the one I tend to believe, if by process of elimination. a) is unlikely and c) is inconceivable.

But frankly, it doesn't matter. The administration's WMD danger claim is already discredited by the simple fact that they weren't used against the invading forces.

Simply put, WMDs are the ultimate deterrence. We had WMDs (nuclear weapons) to offset a perceived conventional military disavantage in comparison to the Soviet Union. We never used WMDs, except in Hiroshima, but they served as a deterrence. WMDs are the main reason no one has invaded Israel in the last 30 years. Had the Soviets invaded the United States, you can be certain we would've used them. If nothing else, WMDs are there to be used in a last ditch effort against foreign invaders.

If Saddam was EVER going to use WMDs, he would've used them as a last ditch effort against the foreign invaders whose stated goal was to get rid of him. It seems as clear as day. The fact that he didn't use them is a damning indictment of the administration. Either a) he didn't had them or b) they were so ineffective as to pose no serious danger. If he didn't or couldn't use them against the invaders, when WOULD he use them? If WMDs were not employed as a final effort to save Saddam's dictatorship, then why should the ordinary American fear they could've been used in Manhattan or DC?

An invasion was the one time Saddam was guaranteed to use effective WMDs if he had them. None were used. You draw your own conclusions.