Dave Winer May Have Convinced Himself of a Need for War Against Iraq
Dave Winer has begun to say things on Scripting News that imply that he is in favor of an attack on Iraq. This is significant because he has been very skeptical about many Bush Administration activities since September 11.
Yesterday, he reflected on the speeches given in response to the reports by Blix and El Baradei:
I listened to the UN report by the inspectors, and reps from all sides, including Iraq. I think the UK and US make good points that the French, Russian and Chinese didn't address. Do I think Hussein is serious about disarming? Come on, give me a break.... I'm still not sure it's best for the US to invade Iraq, but I don't buy the arguments our supposed allies are providing against going to war.
And then today, Winer comments on the Max Boot editorial in the New York Times that debunks the leftist theory that the U.S. wants to go to war primarily to control Iraq's oil resources:
...we all know what he does with the oil money -- he uses it to build nukes, missiles to deliver them, etc etc.... Why anyone would stand up for him is beyond me. Yet that's what the French, Germans, Russians and Chinese (and others) are doing. This makes no sense. (Unless you consider the possibility that they have conflicts of interest.)
Maybe what Winer is hinting at is that an invasion would uncover a great deal of evidence that these countries did business with Iraq that advanced Iraq's weapons programs.
In any event, it is interesting to read Winer's views at this critical time, given his skepticism about some of the administration's domestic security agenda, and his lack of respect for many Bush appointees.