most of the negative assessments of the second war in Iraq are based on two facts. The first is that no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, although the invasion was justified primarily by their existence. The second fact is that it was not possible to establish a Western-style democracy in Iraq, although it was said that this was what many were counting on.
The weapons of mass destruction argument is wrong from the start, on both sides. Thanks to the invasion, we learned that Saddam’s regime was not in danger of using these weapons. But if it weren’t for the invasion, we wouldn’t have known. So to argue this fact against an invasion is strange to say the least. Of course, the war was officially justified by various intelligence reports that Saddam almost certainly had the weapons, and that information turned out to be wrong.
You can read the whole article if you buy a Digital subscription of .week. We now also offer the possibility to purchase joint access to .tježen and Denník N.
sign up to subscribe