We’ve had our share of economic bubbles—the Internet, NASDAQ, the Dow—so why not a political bubble? Today’s Washington Post reports the Bush Administration has failed to provide evidence that Iraq has any factory making biological, chemical or nuclear weapons. A few days back, the Post noted that senior military officers oppose an invasion because the current policy of containment is working. And The New York Times has pointed out that an invasion could severely damage the U.S. economy (most of the $60 billion tab for the Persian Gulf war was picked up by the Saudis). Senate hearings on invading Iraq begin today. It’s not inconceivable that one day people might look back on the idea of invading Iraq and, like the merger of AOL and TimeWarner, say, What were they thinking?
WP on factories: “The decision about war hinges largely on a single issue: whether Iraq is actively seeking biological, chemical and nuclear weapons that could pose a threat to the United States and its allies, and how to respond if so…But intelligence officials and military experts on Iraq express caution. While many analysts are convinced that Iraq is rebuilding its stockpile of weapons, the White House has not publicly offered evidence of a single factory or lab known to be actively producing them. Congressional officials who receive classified briefings on Iraq say the case has not yet been made there, either–in part because of what some officials perceive as a lack of reliable intelligence-gathering on the ground.”
WP on military opposition: “Despite President Bush’s repeated bellicose statements about Iraq, many senior U.S. military officers contend that President Saddam Hussein poses no immediate threat and that the United States should continue its policy of containment rather than invade Iraq to force a change of leadership in Baghdad…The senior officers’ position–that the risks of dropping a successful containment policy for a more aggressive military campaign are so great that it would be unwise to do so–was made clear in the course of several interviews with officials inside and outside the Pentagon.”
NYT on economic fallout: “An American attack on Iraq could profoundly affect the American economy, because the United States would have to pay most of the cost and bear the brunt of any oil price shock or other market disruptions, government officials, diplomats and economists say…Unless the economic outlook brightens, the government could well find itself spending heavily on the military even as the economy recovers falteringly from last year’s recession. Already, the federal budget deficit is expanding, meaning that the bill for a war would lead either to more red ink or to cutbacks in domestic programs.”
