|
|
|
Washington Post Editorial Board Attempts
To Erase Its Pre-War Rush To Invasion
Think
Progress
Friday, May 2, 2008
Today marks the fifth anniversary of President Bush’s
“Mission Accomplished” speech aboard the U.S.S. Abraham
Lincoln. To commemorate the occasion, the Washington Post has trotted
out its editorial from May 4, 2003. The reprinted editorial contains
a preface, emphasizing that the WP disagreed with the infamous banner:
Five years ago, President Bush declared the mission in Iraq accomplished.
The Post editorial board disagreed. Here’s what the board
wrote on May 4, 2003. […]
Still, it’s also impossible to agree with the
banner that was draped near Mr. Bush on the carrier deck, proclaiming
“Mission Accomplished.” Aides say the slogan was chosen
in part to mark a presidential turn toward domestic affairs as his
campaign for reelection approaches. … There is much to be done;
the greatest tests and risks still lie in the future.
It’s wonderful that the WP didn’t buy into Bush’s
PR stunt on May 1, 2003. But this self-congratulatory reprinting of
its May 4 op-ed is disingenuous. Among the the nation’s major
newspapers, the WP editorial board was one of the loudest cheerleaders
for war in Iraq. As Chris Mooney wrote for the Columbia Journalism Review:
The paper started out hawkishly, echoing many of Bush’s
arguments and calling war “an operation essential to American
security” even before Powell’s presentation. The Post
then quickly endorsed Powell’s WMD and al Qaeda claims. …
Yet as invasion approached, the paper shifted its tone. In two lengthy
editorials, it directly answered antiwar arguments and responded to
readers who’d accused the paper of “jingoism.” Following
this public grappling with dissent, the Post unleashed a flurry of
editorials smacking the Bush administration for “worryingly
vague” postwar planning. … The paper never changed its
stance on war, however.
As much as it would like to pat itself on the back for getting one
right, the WP editorial board had many more that were wrong. A few
lowlights:
“After Secretary of State Colin L. Powell’s presentation
to the United Nations Security Council yesterday, it is hard to
imagine how anyone could doubt that Iraq possesses weapons of mass
destruction.” [2/6/03]
“The Perils of Passivity” [2/13/03]
“But the United States cannot again join the Security Council
in backing down from a confrontation with the Iraqi dictator, as
it did repeatedly during the 1990s, also under pressure from France
and Russia.” [2/16/03]
“In the case of Iraq, the functioning of American
democracy has been pretty straightforward. President Bush has been
respectful of opponents, at least at home, as he should be on such
a momentous issue.” [2/23/03]
Evidently, getting just one editorial right is a “mission accomplished”
for the Washington Post.
|
