Iraq-War Decision

 *  Until recently, most critics of the Iraq war lamented its conduct. Only a few of us saw it as a destructive violation of ethically valuable international conventions from its conception. Now some early proponents of the war regret it, and some leaders regard the invasion of Iraq as our worst foreign-policy debacle ever. Nevertheless, we must try to leave Iraq in the best condition possible in a reasonable time; and that will cost much more of our treasure, many more of our soldiers' lives and many more innocent Iraqi lives on our watch.
 *  In hopes of avoiding a repeat of this gigantic ethical lapse, congress should use its subpoena power to discover the sequence of discussions about Iraq among administration advisers and deciders from the mid 90s up to the invasion.
 *  Why did the Neocons and Vulcans think it would be good to destroy one of the few antitheocratic regimes in the middle east? Why didn't Congress, journalists and Colin Powell insist on seeing raw, uncooked evidence for and against invading Iraq? By what dynamic did Cheney & Rumsfeld suppress evidence that Saddam hated al-Qaida and that claims of WMD in Iraq were phony? What charge did Rumsfeld give his Pentagon intelligence group? Consistent with his memo advising Republicans to maximize the political advantage handed to them by the 9/11 attack, did Karl Rove mention to the deciders or fellow advisers that attacking Iraq in 2003 would stop the national conversation about Bush's alleged insider-trading crimes at Harken Energy and that it would insure a landslide Republican victory in the upcoming mid-term elections, despite failure to cripple al-Qaida and Taliban in Afghanistan/Pakistan? What did Bush's spiritual advisers tell him about invading Iraq?
 *  It is with regret that I must suggest that the only way to prevent future think tanks and administrations from repeating such destructive policies is to heap disgrace on all participants in the decision to invade Iraq.