corrente

But it's always nice for those of us in the reality-based community to be proved 100% right, all along.

From the Times (of London, The Secret Downing Street Memo:

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
(via Times)

The grovelling by the wingers and the DINO apologists and the media whores may now commence.

I'll wait.

What's that I hear? A deafening silence? Look! Over there! Jennifer Wilbanks

NOTE A less notice paragraph in The Downing Street Memo is the following:

The two broad US options were:

(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up ...

(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option.

Generous of the Iraqis, what? But wait... Why is the Gulf of Tonkin coming into my mind? Or the Nazi invasion of Poland... Give me a minute, I'll get it...