Amusing op-ed piece from the New York Times. It takes the spin (as I read it) that so many anti-war folks have staked their reputation on there being no WMD in Iraq, that they're deliberately downplaying the gallon of Sarin that was detonated a few days ago.

] You never saw such a rush to dismiss this as not news. U.N.
] weapons inspectors whose reputations rest on denial of Saddam's
] W.M.D. pooh-poohed the report.
. . .
] In this rush to misjudgment, we can see an example of the "Four
] Noes" that have become the defeatists' platform.
] The first "no" is no stockpiles of W.M.D., used to justify the
] war, were found. With the qualifier "so far" left out, the
] absence of evidence is taken to be evidence of absence.

Heh.

[ I've seen a lot of that indeed. I'm reserving judgement until i know more.

I won't change my mind that the pre-war intelligence still wasn't as compelling as the administration would have you believe, and even if we find 50 nukes in a warehouse, i don't think that what intelligence we had indicated that. Of course, the point is moot, because if we find 50 nukes, then the war is justified ex post facto, i suppose.

In the meantime, this isn't 50 nukes. It's one artillery round. If a report comes out that this sarin was made last year, then yeah, that's something. If we find a whole bunch more of them, then that's something too, i guess, but I'm not gonna change my mind over one lonely shell.

In total i think this single object probably neither proves nor disproves either side, but it's definitely something to keep watch on. -k]

Sarin? What Sarin?