No matter how much Bush screwed up securing the peace in Iraq, it didn't seem to make any difference during the elections. When an Iraqi letter detailed all the widespread looting of the very sites we were supposedly invading to clamp down on, it created a furor -- that someone was trying to damage Bush politically. Iraqis were afraid to say more until now, but the New York Times has revealed a lot more detail about the systematic plundering.
"In the weeks after Baghdad fell in April 2003, looters systematically dismantled and removed tons of machinery from Saddam Hussein's most important weapons installations, including some with high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear arms, a senior Iraqi official said this week in the government's first extensive comments on the looting," reports the NYT.
"The threat posed by these types of facilities was cited by the Bush administration as a reason for invading Iraq, but the installations were left largely unguarded by allied forces in the chaotic months after the invasion."
"American military officials in Baghdad did not respond to repeated requests for comment on the findings. But American officials have said in the past that while they were aware of the importance of some of the installations, there was not enough military personnel to guard all of them during and after the invasion."
And my favorite:
"White House officials, apprised of the Iraqi account by The New York Times, said it was already well known that many weapons sites had been looted. They had no other comment."
Geez, everyone already knows how bad we screwed up. Why are you bringing it up again?
This is one more example of why positive effects from the Iraqi election don't mean Bush gets a free pass for his incompetence. Some good may come out of this, but it will be DESPITE Bush's best efforts, not because of them.
