Elements of the Kerry campaign, including CBS, The New York Times and the candidate himself, have alleged that the U.S. Military's tactical planners in Iraq are incompetent - and thus, President Bush by extension. This with the only actual eyewitness evidence being that the explosives at Al Qaaqaa weren't there when U.S. forces arrived in early 2003 (when liberals would have preferred that they were guarding the Baghdad Museum).
Now, it appears that one of the Kerry Global Test Proctors, Russia, was involved in the movement of these powerful explosives, before the invasion. Explosives useful to bring down buildings, airplanes and trigger a nuclear weapon (though there are no WMDs, mind you). And ABC reports that it may all be exaggerated anyway. Of course, that didn't stop Kerry from ignoring the facts and reiterating his only argument for a Kerry presidency, that Bush is a bad tactical war planner.
And Kerry's complaints about the missing explosives underscore the emptiness of his candidacy. Saddam wasn't a threat, but he was, but he wasn't, but he had these horribly powerful weapons, but he didn't have bad weapons, and besides, we should have sent our troops to get a hold of them, but we really shouldn't have invaded and Bush is stupid for not standing guard over Al Qaaqaa or committing troops to Tora Bora, which was a good idea at the time when he supported but doesn't now when he needs a talking point for today. Blah blah blah.
There were only 2 ways to secure these explosives. Either U.S. soldiers could go to Al Qaaqaa and secure them or Saddam could. In the first scenario, terrorists might get them, but with U.S. soldiers patrolling their streets. In the second, Saddam could do as he wanted and give them to terrorists. Kerry preferred the latter. Still does.
And now, a word from our sponsors.
