I protest.

What others think of the neocons.

Origins of Regime Change in Iraq

The "neo-conservatives," among whom are Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and a number of others, have wanted this war for a long time. They tried to get Clinton to wage it; he refused. Then after 9/11 they saw their chance to implement their "Project for a New American Century" (and an arrogant title that is, too!); they finally convinced Bushie that Iraq would be a pushover. With Iraq out of the way, they could redraw the map of the Middle East the way they want. As the article referred to above says,

"Change toward democratic regimes in Tehran and Baghdad would unleash a tsunami across the Islamic world," claimed Joshua Muravchik in August of that year. Michael Ledeen on September 4, 2002, called for the US to launch "a vast democratic revolution to liberate all the peoples of the Middle East… It is impossible to imagine that the Iranian people would tolerate tyranny in their own country once freedom had come to Iraq. Syria would follow in short order."

Democracy experts, including Carnegie's Tom Carothers, call this vision "a dangerous fantasy."

These people are intelligent, well-educated, and they are fools. They have guided us into a morass from which we will have a very difficult time extricating ourselves. If we can at all.

And these are the people whom Bush placed in power in the United States.

As someone once said, we may not have the leaders we need, but we certainly have the leaders we deserve. For allowing these criminals into power in the first place.