The US Administration has probably arrived at an opinion that it's time to open up the secret of the Iraqi war reasons
US Deputy Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz, one of the firmest advocates of decisive military action opened up his heart. Wolfowitz said in an interview with the magazine Vanity Fair that weapons of mass destruction allegedly held by the Iraqi regime were not the main reason why the war in Iraq had started. He said that the USA had chosen Iraq's alleged stocks of chemical and biological weapons to justify going to war for bureaucratic reasons. In the words of Wolfowitz, search and liquidation of weapons of mass destruction allegedly held by Iraq "became the main argument for going to war with Iraq because all arms of the bureaucracy could agree on this argument."
The main reason of war in Iraq, Wolfowitz says, was that the USA wanted to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Another reason for going to war with Iraq, a secondary one but not less important in this case, was that the USA could withdraw the troops from Saudi Arabia when the war in Iraq is over. At that, US's influence in the Middle East wouldn't suffer at all. Paul Wolfowitz didn't specify where the US troops would be removed then; he only mentioned that the troops "would become a permanent irritant to al-Qaeda terrorists." It has been reported long ago already that Americans planned to set up military bases on the Iraqi territory. Certainly, the Pentagon refuted the information, but it sounded unconvincing at that.
It is interesting that the statement of the deputy secretary of defence cast doubt on one of the main foreign political doctrines of the US Administration. This is the doctrine of legitimacy of military force use against "irresponsible" regimes developing weapons of mass destruction and threatening US's national security. At that, this very reason, the White House thinks, is a serious argument to exert pressure upon Iran, North Korea and Syria. As it turns out now, the main reason of the US's aggression is explained not with the desire to liquidate weapons of mass destruction, but with the fact that America dislikes some political regimes. To tell the truth, this attitude has never been a secret, but the present-day administration of the USA is speaking about it so openly for the first time.
It seems that British Prime Minister Tony Blair is the only man who still believes that Iraq actually holds weapons of mass destruction. However, he doesn't hope that evidence of it can be discovered very quickly. In the words of Tony Blair, it may take weeks and months to prove that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. It seems that the White House is no longer supporting this confidence of the ally, if they have ever did.
Russia does not deliberately attack supply lines in Ukraine that supply Western weapons. It has found a new, much more effective and less costly way to destroy it. So say the authors of the Chinese Sohu.