John McCain has a problem.
Here is what he said in a February, 2003 speech that was quoted in a 2/19/03 Arizona Republic editorial sympathetic to the proposed Iraq invasion:
"Is there any doubt in anybody's mind that if Saddam Hussein thought he could harm the United States that he wouldn't give any terrorist organization some weapon of mass destruction?" McCain asked in a speech last week sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
"I don't think he would discriminate."
This was directly contradicted by the available intelligence at the time.
[ I know what you're asking- where's the link? Oddly, I can't find this quote on the web, which is probably why it hasn't gotten the attention it deserves. I found it in the archives of the Arizona Republic. You have to pay $ to get to it. I think this link should get you to a preview of the article, where you can buy it if you want. ]
The best guess of the intelligence community was that Saddam was unlikely to use WMD against us if we didn't attack him. From the key judgments of the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate:
We have low confidence in our ability to assess when Saddam would use WMD.
Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger cause for making war.
(CBW=Chemical/Biological weapons, i.e., WMD)
And from a 10/2/02 closed hearing whose findings were even declassifed before the Iraq war vote:
Senator Levin Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan : . . . If (Saddam) didn't feel threatened, did not feel threatened, is it likely that he would initiate an attack using a weapon of mass destruction?
Senior Intelligence Witness: . . . My judgment would be that the probability of him initiating an attack -- let me put a time frame on it -- in the foreseeable future, given the conditions we understand now, the likelihood I think would be low.
Senator Levin: Now if he did initiate an attack you've . . . indicated he would probably attempt clandestine attacks against us . . . But what about his use of weapons of mass destruction? If we initiate an attack and he thought he was in extremis or otherwise, what's the likelihood in response to our attack that he would use chemical or biological weapons?
Senior Intelligence Witness: Pretty high, in my view.
It is true that the NIE and the intelligence witness said that if Saddam thought we were going to attack he was likely to use WMD against us. In no way does that get McCain off the hook, though. McCain clearly said what he said as justification for invading. If Saddam didn't think he was going to be attacked, our analysts were saying he was unlikely to use them or give them to terrorists to be used against us. And in any case, the intelligence analysts had low confidence in their ability to judge when Saddam would use them or pass them on, so there was no justification for McCain to express such confidence, regardless.
Here's the answer to his question, "Is there any doubt in anybody's mind?": Hell, yes, there was a lot of doubt in the minds of the experts on the topic. In fact, their best judgment was that Saddam was unlikely to do what McCain said he was sure he would do. What valid basis did McCain have for being so sure? After all, he says he was briefed numerous times on the NIE and read the Executive Summary. And after all, over and over again we've heard from war supporters that the case for war was based on the intelligence available at the time.
Remember, McCain's quote appeared in an Arizona Republic op-ed that helped make the case for war.
So here's my question for him:
"Senator McCain, why were you expressing such confidence that Saddam would give WMD to terrorists if he thought they could harm us when the intelligence community had low confidence in this area and their best guess was that he was unlikely to do so if he did not think we were going to attack?"
Let's make sure he gets asked this question before the campaign is over.