Here is one of Josh Marshall's entries from March 17:
One of the things we hear again and again from the administration is that Saddam Hussein still had both the intention and the capability to build and possess weapons of mass destruction.
Isn't this a logical fallacy?
I mean, if you have the intention to build WMDs and the ability to build them, then you have WMDs. It's about as close to 2 + 2 = 4 as you get in human affairs.
Not that this is the biggest bit of ridiculousness coming out 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue these days. But it's worth noting.
We can infer from the fact that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction that he lacked either the intention or the ability to have them. Something is missing from the equation. Maybe he had the intention to build them later. Maybe he was working to get back the ability. But he really couldn't have had both.
It's just 'p's and 'q's.
-- Josh Marshall
I am, personally, having trouble with Josh's logic. Usually I am not one to argue with Marshall.
Ever. We share common political views, and let's face it, he is far better versed in the machinations of our political system than I will ever be.
But...
I read Marshall's entry while watching a cooking show last night, so try to follow my train of thought.
Consider a simple potato gratin.
Let's say I have the intent to cook a potato gratin. That is, at some point in the near future I will make a potato gratin.
You know what else? I also have the capability of making a gratin. I have all the constituent ingredients: potato, half and half, salt and pepper, herbs, mushrooms, other filler. I also have all the requisite tools: gratin baking dish, oven, electricity.
But you know what else, if you were to walk into my house right now you couldn't find a potato gratin to save your life.
Maybe it's different with WMD...
Did Iraq have any of the requisite materials for producing WMD?
Any comments/explanations greatly appreciated.
Mike
