The Washington Post published an op-ed by former Clinton Administration official Paul Zimmerman broadening the attack on President Bush about the Iraqi nuclear weapons program. This part of the article is a midly broader rehash of old arguments. If we erred in guessing the state of Iraq's program, so be it. But that's a far cry from proving there was no program. The arguments to the contrary are the Rodney King Video of foreign policy. I don't care how much you zoom in, how many details you call into question. The guy still got one hell of a beating.

At the end of the article, he claims that Bush pere also [sic] took us to war against Iraq under false pretenses, that Iraq never had any intention of invading Saudi Arabia, and that there weren't even that many troops or tanks in Kuwait. Well, no, you don't need that many troops to control a country virtually without armed forces. There were, however, thousands of tanks just on the Iraqi side of the line. Zimmerman's point is that the Iraqis weren't going after Saudi. Does anyone doubt their intention to dominate the region, without attacking Saudi, if possible? What on earth is Zimmerman trying to prove here? Next he'll be claiming that Iraq never really invaded Kuwait at all.

Note to Former Clinton Administration Officials: 1) When you write something, make sure you have something new to say, and 2) Make sure it isn't idiotic.