James Sensenbrenner, February 16, 2004

On Sunday February 7, President Bush gave a rare interview to the press by appearing on the show "Meet the Press" hosted by Tim Russert, arguably the toughest journalist in the nation. The interview covered many topics, ranging from foreign affairs, to domestic issues. But in light of recent events, one part of the questioning - dealing with the decision to send American troops in Iraq - has received considerable attention.

President Bush’s decision to go to war in Iraq has come under increasing scrutiny because large stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have not yet been found. This has led some to assert that our President lied in order to help justify the war in Iraq. People claim the President said that Iraq posed an imminent threat, and that we had to go to war because we could have WMD launched against us at any moment.

This is not true. In fact, President Bush has said that an imminent threat would mean that it would be too late for our nation to defend itself. Based on the information provided by intelligence agencies prior to going to war, combined with the painful memory of the events of September 11, 2001, the President believed that Iraq posed a grave and gathering threat, and he acted so as to prevent another 9/11 type event -- before the threat became imminent. Moreover, the Clinton administration, the governments of Britain, Germany and France, most of the senior United Nations (UN) weapons inspectors and most Democratic Senators were also convinced that Iraq posed a threat to the region and the world.

It’s true that today, almost a year later, we still haven’t found WMD. But we have learned that Iraq had a WMD program. We have found nuclear arms materials, including documents and components of a gas centrifuge used for uranium enrichment. We have also discovered mass graves of thousands who were slaughtered by the regime.

Our country’s leaders don’t simply ‘shoot from the hip’ when making decisions about going to war. To think so does a disservice to this country, the principles it was built upon, and most importantly, to its citizens. The President’s decision was based on the information available to him, and was made during a time when inaction appeared to be a much worse course of action.

To better understand any possible intelligence weaknesses, President Bush recently issued an Executive Order to establish an independent and bipartisan Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. The commission will report its findings and recommendations to the President in March 2005.

Last October, the Iraq Survey Group issued an interim report to Congress relative to Iraq’s WMD programs. The report concluded that under Saddam Hussein’s rule, Iraq was in clear violation of UN Resolution 1441, and it went further into breach after the resolution was passed. More recently, in his testimony before Congress, Chief Weapons Inspector David Kay made two things abundantly clear: first, President Bush and Congress absolutely made the right decision to remove Saddam from power. And second, that although the US did not find the weapons that several presidential administrations and foreign intelligence agencies believed were there, Saddam may have posed a bigger danger than we thought before the war.

I supported, and still do, President Bush’s decision to go to war in Iraq. I remember vividly the events of September 11. I believe that even if Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, given what we have already discovered, the world is a safer place now that Saddam no longer rules Iraq.

Congressman James Sensenbrenner, a Republican, represents the Fifth Congressional District of Wisconsin. He chairs of the House Judiciary Committee.