Back Channel to Peace

Let's start out my blog with a tasty tidbit I heard all over the news this week: many variations of "Iraqi envoy attempted peace negotiation before war" story.

The gist is that Iraq was trying to negotiate a peace through back channels in the days right before the war to avoid invasion. They sent an envoy and (gasp!) the Bush administration missed the chance.

Mainstream media was almost gleeful with this story. I heard it everywhere.

Now, there's at least 2 reasons why this story is silly and less than meets the eye.

1. Sadaam did not have to negotiate back channel. He can pick up the phone and call the White House. I'm guessing they would take his call. He was asked publicly to adhere to the UN resolutions. He declined. He was asked publicly to step down and leave. He declined. Tanks and planes were the necessary answer.

2. A lesser publicized story from the same week, which I only saw on the grassroots electronic media, was from Tariq Aziz, high confidante to Sadaam who's in custody and singing now that his family is out of Iraq. Aziz says that Sadaam never believed the U.S. would invade. Even right up to and after the tanks started over the berm into Iraq. he believed his Russian and French allies would step in and thwart the U.S. He severely "misunderestimated" George W.

You can tell partisans, like me, by their friends and enemies. Who do they support, even when the evidence would indicate otherwise? Who do they criticize, even when the evidence is thin?

In their gleeful embrace of this wisp of an Iraqi back channel story the elite media once again raises the leftist banner. They were clearly wishing it was true Bush missed a chance for peace. Not attractive.