G-Dubs the Misleader

I've done a lot of thinking about the War in Iraq. I've set Bush's words against his past, the time period, etc and tried to figure out what was really going on there. Most people I know will agree in hindsight that our justifications for entering that war were flawed. There was little evidence (as we are reminded by the reading) of nuclear weaponry, one of the main focuses of Bush's speech and one of his primary 'motivations' for the war.

GW misled us. While he did not explicitly say that Iraq has nuclear weapons, or that Iraq plans to attack us, he obviously intended for that to be implied to the American public. Now, as with any lie/misdirection/deception/secret, I consider the motivation and intention.  It wasn't because they had nuclear weapons since that was the lie.  As an economics major, I'd like to believe it boiled down to money and oil, but I really don't think that was it either. So why were we wasting our time and money, and risking the distrust of the American people? The only conclusion I can really come to terms with is misdirected anger at 9/11. It was easy to blame any Arab and/or Muslim group and get away with it, since we had a very public and violent crime take place within our borders. Here was somewhere to direct the American fear and hatred. We were ready to unite against an enemy, and GW found one. Yet one more lie gone awry... GW didn't think this one through. When the public finds out that they were lied to, they get mad, really mad. The CIA figured this out fast; they have a decent learning curve it seems. But GW believed what GW wanted to believe and he went forth with an unjustifiable war anyway. There seems to be a lot of evidence that pointed to waiting for more international/UN support before beginning a war in Iraq. There was no evidence of any immediate danger to our country. Saddam Hussein was evil and horrible to his people, but issues of human rights should filter through the international community as much as possible (and besides this was never used as an original justification for the war).

Where am I going with this? There may have been justifiable reasons to go to war in Iraq, of which humanitarian reasons may have been just one of many. However our reasons were not justified. GW lied to satisfy some bizarre ulterior motive which I don't think has yet been fully revealed. I honestly don't know why we are there past my own incomplete speculation. What I am convinced of is that GW's lies have not been proven to be justified in any way, shape, or form. There is nothing here that implies a better quality or quantity of life for anyone involved (in particular the American or Iraqi people) except for maybe Halliburton. There was no international agreement and no justification made. I see no evidence of moral intent, moral means, or moral ends. This was not a moral lie (as current evidence shows).