Why the U.S. Went to Iraq

In Today's Wall Street Journal

Fouad Ajami does not dedicate time, six years after the attack on Iraq, to address how the coalition went to war. His competence could be of assistance in addressing what options were before the heads of governments of the U.S., the U.K., Australia, Spain, Portugal and Italy in the fall of 2002. In fact, in an interview which appeared both in the U.S. and the Spanish press, Prime Minister José María Aznar spoke of a real possibility to create the political conditions for a peaceful, but one not immune from prosecution, transfer or exile, for Saddam Hussein, which could have averted a military intervention. Some sort of action against Iraq was certainly necessary, and long time due. The choices that were made to pursue the ousting of Mr. Hussein have not only proven to be expensive, and not yet as effective as predicted, but have also disqualified the promotion of democracy as a weapon of mass attraction, for which we could pay dearly in the future.

Marco Perduca
Senator
Radical/Democratic Party
Rome