Mainlining Kristol meth

Here's what Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, one of the major intellectual/propagandist architects of the war in Iraq wrote just before the invasion (thanks to Andrew Sullivan for finding it):

“We are tempted to comment, in these last days before the war, on the U.N., and the French, and the Democrats. But the war itself will clarify who was right and who was wrong about weapons of mass destruction. It will reveal the aspirations of the people of Iraq, and expose the truth about Saddam’s regime. It will produce whatever effects it will produce on neighboring countries and on the broader war on terror. We would note now that even the threat of war against Saddam seems to be encouraging stirrings toward political reform in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and a measure of cooperation in the war against al Qaeda from other governments in the region. It turns out it really is better to be respected and feared than to be thought to share, with exquisite sensitivity, other people’s pain. History and reality are about to weigh in, and we are inclined simply to let them render their verdicts,” - Bill Kristol, March 17, 2003.

It's fascinating that somebody who has been so wrong at almost every turn about the Iraq war -- and has not only never apologized for being wrong but never evinced even the slightest hint self-doubt or even of wondering why he was so wrong or had a moment of concern about the young men and women sent to death of lifelong maiming -- is still given the opportunity to express himself on all kinds of media with virtually no challenge to his previous wrong-headed statements and predictions. Meanwhile, those who were closest to right before the war -- heard from Scott Ritter lately?-- are still relegated to the fringes and considered slightly kooky. What a media culture, where being wrong but sounding confident gains you more credibility than being right!