What the hell were they thinking? That's the question people are beginning to ask about the Iraq invasion. But we have a much more interesting one: what if the people who who assured us that invading Iraq would be fun, profitable and easy actually had to deal with the consequences of their lies?
Just imagine a whiney neocon columnist sweating it out on sentry duty at a Fallujah street corner, looking around desperately for those millions of grateful, pro-American Iraqis he assured us were just waiting for their chance to emerge.
Imagine the wretch pissing his ill-fitting Army trousers every time a bus backfires, being spat on by every urchin he tries to offer a stick of gum or free copy of Adam Smith, and finally dying in terror and pain after an ambush by the ungrateful, anti-American Iraqis he promised us didn't exist
Unfortunately, we can't draft these people and ship them off to Iraq. They managed to avoid Nam, after all, and now age is on their side. They've seen to it that neither they nor a single one of their relatives will ever have to share the horrors they forced on thousands of ordinary American soldiers.
But we can still bring the world of consequences to the swine who got us into this nightmare. For starters, we can go back and find out exactly who was promising us we'd be worshipped as liberators if we invaded. We can print the names of these jerks, reprint the idiotic fantasies they sold the American public, and leave it to that public to take its own revenge. We're starting with some of the more obscure, small-time warmongers. We invite you, our readers, to find and send us the work of other warmongers, big and small, so we can drag their lies into the light. Just them to me: email@example.com
What sort of revenge should we take on these pigs? That's up to you. Use your imagination. Call one at 3 am for five nights running and scream at him in a bad Arab accent, "Zank you for invading my country, peeg!" Send him suspect packages with a telltale whiff of falafel, and nothing but a "Thanks for the Invasion" card inside. The possibilities are endless: key his BMW, decapitate his parakeet, agent-orange his lawn.
Of course, in suggesting these illegal actions, we're only kidding. Ha-ha-ha.
But we do believe, like good conservatives everywhere, that people should take responsibility for their actions. So we're going to help the pundits who got us into the Iraqi quagmire take responsibility for their actions by reprinting the lies they were telling about Iraq, back before reality set in. Here, then, is the first installment of a new eXile feature, "They Told You So," replaying the Classic Hits of pro-invasion lies.
When we've reprinted the worst of each contender, we'll hold an eXile poll and let U, the reader, pick the very worst of the worst. We'll plaster his (or her) picture all over the Internet and encourage an enraged citizenry to be as imaginative and retributive as it can get. So start keeping score and get ready to play They Told You So, the Game of Personal Responsibility!
First Nominee: Andrew West
Almost exactly a year ago (March 17, 2003), writer Andrew West took five minutes out of his busy schedule to write to his fellow shareholders in USA, Inc. a memo explaining the reasons a bottom-line guy like West was ready to go to war.
West's argument is simple: "I'm in favor of war on Iraq because I don't want to be killed by terrorists who get access to weapons [Iraq] is trying to develop. The World Trade Center attack dramatically alerted Americans to the fact that there are some people in the world who want us dead...Why aren't most people in Manhattan already dead? It is because anti-American terrorists haven't gotten their hands on atom-bombs, or major biological weapons, yet. Where could terrorist groups get their hands on such weapons? From governments that have both stated and displayed their hatred for the U.S., and that are attempting to develop such weapons. Which countries? Iraq and North Korea are currently in the lead in this regard."