Dan Gomez: The real reasons for going to war with Iraq

During the lead-up to war in Iraq, there was a bitter struggle between those who did and did not support the war. This struggle even came to our campus, with an extremely loud and active group of people who were absolutely opposed to any military action to depose Saddam Hussein.

The anti-war sentiment was based almost entirely on anti-Bush feelings. Those who opposed the war could find no real reason to oppose it, so they began inventing the conspiracy theories that Bush and his team pressured the CIA and FBI into fabricating intelligence.

In the end, the anti-war protesters thought they were smarter than the entire intelligence community. They "knew" there weren't weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and if there were, then Hans "Mr. Magoo" Blix would find them. They also "knew" there was no link between al Qaeda and Iraq.

Recent intelligence, however, has discredited all of these objections to the war in Iraq. It turns out that Iraq was, in fact, actively pursuing the development of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems.

The Iraq Survey Group, a team put together by the United States to search for weapons of mass destruction, recently stated that, "We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations inspections that began in late 2002."

Included in these programs are possible biological weapons research and development sites, a live strain of botulinum toxin and the involvement of the Iraqi Intelligence Service in concealment of biological weapons-related programs. There is also reason to believe that Iraq planned on resurrecting its nuclear weapons development program once international (and by international I mean U.S.) pressure had been lifted.

The Iraq Survey Group also concluded that Iraq was actively engaged in increasing the range and effectiveness of their missile systems.

However, regardless of whether the United States finds any more evidence of weapons of mass destruction programs, it has now become clear that, despite what the experts at "Penn for Peace" concluded, Iraq and al Qaeda had an active, working relationship with each other, stretching from 1990 to 2003.

The Weekly Standard has recently published information on a secret U.S. government memo which detailed cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terror network. Here are some of the highlights:

• Osama bin Laden, on more than one occasion, requested and received assistance from the Iraqi Intelligence Service in the development of parcel bombs, bombs that could be placed on aircraft and detonated due to barometric pressure and the manufacture of fake passports.

• Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi (a high-ranking al Qaeda operative) was told to go to Iraq to obtain poisons and gases training. Al Qaeda later sent two more agents for chemical and biological weapons training after the U.S.S. Cole bombing. There is also evidence that bin Laden asked Iraq for advanced weapons, including chemical and biological weapons and poisons. Iraq surely turned them away, since they, according to the Penn Democrats, didn't have the weapons in the first place.

• Even after the Sept. 11 attacks, there was a secret agreement between al Qaeda and Iraq whereby Iraq would be a haven for terrorists, providing them with money and weapons.

• There is even a possible direct link to the Sept. 11 attacks -- an Iraqi national, who may have been an Iraqi agent, escorted 9/11 conspirators to a planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur.

I can already hear the Left revving up their Magical Clairvoyance Machine to come up with a completely nonsensical answer to this newly public intelligence: Bush and his team forced the CIA to say these things.

But here comes the kicker: most of this intelligence was gathered during the Clinton era.

The fact of the matter is that whether or not Iraq had weapons of mass destruction is irrelevant. The Iraq War was about fighting the war on terror, most specifically (but not exclusively) against al Qaeda. This new intelligence shows that Iraq provided material, monetary and logistical support to al Qaeda and its operatives. In return, al Qaeda aided Iraq in quelling ultra-Islamic revolts and in obtaining illegal weapons (hey, U.N., great job on those weapons inspections!).

There can be absolutely no question that the Bush administration was correct in its assessment of Iraq as a terrorist state. The U.S. was therefore completely justified, in the interest of national security, in invading Iraq.

The war protesters and the painfully useless U.N. refused to believe the world intelligence community. They resorted to vicious slanders against the Bush administration and continued to cloak their anti-Americanism in "true patriotism." They have ultimately been proven to have been working against the safety of Americans and all freedom-loving people.

And yet, it is these same protesters, and the same U.N., that are now demanding that the U.S. abandon Iraqi civilians by withdrawing troops. Unfortunately, it seems as though President Bush has begun to bow under the pressure. But as Americans, we have to ask ourselves, do these people care about America or the average Iraqi? As the evidence has shown, obviously they do not. Dan Gomez is a junior History major from Wayne, Pa. and chairman of the Penn College Republicans.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.