Now Con to the question "Should the US Have Attacked Iraq?"
"History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided - that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should be waged when necessary, and the Iraq War was not. Waging an unnecessary war is a grave mistake. But in reflecting on all that happened during the Bush administration, I've come to believe that an even more fundamental mistake was made - a decision to turn away from candor and honesty when those qualities were most needed."
What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception, 2008
[Editor's Note: Prior to Scott McClellan's 2008 Con position statement above, his position was Pro as indicated in his 2003 statement below.]
"There was a mountain of evidence about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. The threat was real and it became even more real...as we looked at it through the lens of September 11th. It was a grave and gathering threat, as the President pointed out, and it was important that we provide leadership and confront that threat.
The United Nations Security Council provided a resolution that gave Saddam Hussein one last opportunity to comply. Remember, he defied the United Nations and the international community for 12 years. He was an individual that possessed chemical and biological weapons, and sought to reconstitute his nuclear weapons program. He was an individual that had used chemical weapons on his own people in the past. So Iraq was a very unique situation, and it was a part -- it was part of our broader effort to win the war on terrorism."