Hacker News Reader

If we'd investigated the Saudi connections at the time, it might have detracted from the justifications for invading Iraq. By modern parlance, the Saudi stuff was "malinformation": true, but distracting from the official program.

as usual "new" evidence has been seen before, often back when it was relevant. But it wasn't convenient to acknowledge it then.

View on HN

I thought back then that Saudi Arabia deserved to be considered part of the "Axis of Evil" at least as much as Iraq. But we needed the oil and the military bases.

Inasmuch as there was at the time an actual Axis of Evil coordinating with each other and aiding third parties with proliferation of WMDs and associated delivery technology, it was North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran; Saudi Arabia may have been evil, but they weren't part of that WMD proliferation gang.

Neither, of course, was Iraq.

But the Bush Administration needed an excuse for War with Iraq and had interest in protecting Pakistan, so they made some slight edits to a real problem and sold it as an excuse to attack Iraq.

Don't you mean Afghanistan above?

Nope, Iraq. Afghanistan was gonna get hit regardless. Iraq was utterly irrelevant to the situation (as far as I could see), and the excuses for tying it to 9/11 very thin. They did it anyhow.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com