The sad fact about America's invasion of Iraq is that it was totally unnecessary. Iraq had no navy to carry an attack force across the Atlantic Ocean to invade America. It had no fighters or bombers that had the range to fly across the world to rain bombs down upon American's heads. Saddam Hussein was not at the center of a wicked coalition of imperialist nations.

Simply put, Iraq was an isolated backward nation with a broken and poorly equipped military. Its government was cruel, dysfunctional, and maintained control by killing opponents. It had no political infrastructure, so encouraging the populace to support an attack any of its neighbors, let alone the United States, was impossible.

The only way that Iraq could cause any trouble to the US was to sneak biologic or nuclear fissile material (which we now know it did not have) across the borders America shares with Canada or Mexico. Consequently, the best defense to protecting America against the mythical Iraqi WMD's was to seal the borders, stop illegal immigration, and place tight controls on travel to and from Iraq and its neighbors. These options have not been considered throughout the execution of America's War Against International Terrorism.

Gathering basic facts about Iraq, or any other country, was not difficult in 2002, nor is it difficult in 2005. This is the hard reality that faces the Bush Administration as it initiates a new PR campaign to discredit the detractors of the invasion of Iraq. Even though the Bush Administration shaped public opinion to support an Iraqi invasion through members of the mainstream media, including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, The Wall Street Journal, and Judith Miller of The New York Times, there were large numbers of individuals who could find sufficient information to help them develop their own opinions regarding the wisdom (or lack thereof) regarding plans to invade Iraq.

Their views opposing those of the Bush Administration and the two party political system were bolstered by highly regarded writers and thinkers such as Paul Craig Roberts, William Lind, Pat Buchanan, and Joseph Sobran. Many of these notable detractors were, at various times, members of and advisors to Republican presidential administrations and congressional staffs since the 1960's and had earned battle scars in the culture wars pitting limited government conservatism against the liberal leviathan that had become the federal government. Therefore to assault some of the best-reasoned criticisms against a war in Iraq as partisan, liberal carping was a nonstarter.

While America is embroiled in debate over the future direction taken with the occupation of Iraq, any attempt to characterize various positions must be considered to be politically motivated. There is no way to suggest that any portrayal of events that led to the invasion are revisionist or devious because the history of the event will not be written for years to come. This is because the full extent of the consequences of the invasion are yet to be known.

The real problem facing the Bush Administration is not that it has treasonous political enemies seeking its destruction, but that there are many of us in the "red states" who made up our own minds regarding the War Against International Terrorism and stood against the tide of popular opinion to state our opposition. We are simple middle-class laborers that work to care for our families, and lead lives that are easily examined by friends, neighbors, and coworkers.