Mark Fiore explains Why we should invade — right now! Salon; on the other hand, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorializes that there is No way for Bush to justify unprovoked war with Iraq:
…President Bush has yet to offer a concrete, convincing explanation why the United States should launch a major war against Iraq without any clear provocation, without any significant international support, and over the objections and even pleadings of those in the Arab world who have otherwise been our allies.
Nor has the president accepted the reality that he needs congressional approval before launching such a war…
We have …an administration trying to sell a pre-emptive war on the basis of weapons that Iraq might have, and whether it might give those weapons to terrorists. There is no evidence that Hussein has even contemplated such a step, and considerable history to the contrary. For at least 20 years, Hussein has had access to chemical weapons and has never once let them out of his control.
Furthermore, endorsing the concept of pre-emptive war as a legitimate use of power is extremely risky. It is essentially the rationale imperial Japan used to justify its attack on Pearl Harbor more than 60 years ago.
Meanwhile, The Washington Times (not exactly your most reliable source, however), reports the Administration as saying
that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are, finally, all behind the invasion of Iraq concept. Next, For Bush, a New Vulnerability:
“Late last week, the Republican National Committee distributed a memo that unintentionally spoke volumes about how the political ground has shifted for President Bush. The memo’s headline trumpeted four areas of accomplishment for the president, but it did not include the war on terrorism or homeland security.”
Joshua Micah Marshall expounds on “Why the myth of Republican competence persists,
despite all the evidence to the contrary” Washington Monthly