"The intelligence community owes the president, rather than the president owing the American people," an apology. Such were the words expressing the thoughts of David Kay, former lead weapons inspector for the Coalition Forces in Iraq, on the matter of no huge stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) being found within the Iraqi borders at this time (it should be pointed out that he reserves the right not to conclude this as an absolute). But we can be very certain those who did not share the president’s assertion that Saddam Hussein’s regime was an imminent danger will run with this one…oh will they run.

For a moment, let’s take a step back from the brink of divided finger pointing and look at the situation in total. I know it will be hard for the air-punching, fist waving, anti-war liberal left to do so but if you can try to tune them out for just a bit perhaps we can shed some light on a few things.

Ever since the Bush Administration came to grips with the fact France, Germany and Russia were never going to condone having their illegal commerce with Iraq exploited it became clear the only option left to the administration with regard to eliminating the festering boil on the ass of US and world security, that boil being Saddam Hussein, was a use of force. The Bush Administration wasn’t the only administration to believe this boil was a threat to US and world security. The Clinton, George H.W. Bush and Reagan Administrations all championed the belief Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat to the security of the US, the Middle East and the world. To tally it up, the idea that Saddam Hussein had to go was the doctrine of the United States government for over 20 years. While the air-punchers among us will contend that this entire "mess” is the current Bush Administration’s "fault,” history would prove otherwise through the actions of past administrations.

As for "the right” to take the actions we did, I need go no further than citing how many times Hussein’s forces fired on coalition aircraft patrolling the "no-fly zones” during the Gulf War cease-fire. These hostile acts were in direct violation of the cease-fire agreement that suspended the Gulf War hostilities. We have to remember, the Gulf War was never declared over; instead a cease-fire was agreed to so Saddam Hussein’s regime could disarm under the "watchful eye” of the UN. As we stood poised to annihilate Hussein’s army and regime we stopped short in an effort to save lives and gave Hussein a chance to save face. But over 12 years and through a myriad of UN resolutions warning there would be "severe consequences” should he not comply with the elements of the cease-fire, Saddam Hussein employed tactics of defiance in the face of annihilation, and obstruction and deception in dealing with the United Nations.

This defiance, obstruction and deception, teamed with the hostile acts against coalition aircraft nullified the cease-fire agreement and effectively gave the United States and the originally sanctioned Coalition Forces an undisputable green light for the actions taken. No further resolutions were needed. As I have contended from day one of this debate, these issues alone were justification for Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) but no one wants to address these facts.

While Kay’s inspection teams never unearthed the towering pile of WMD that would have satisfied critics of the war, unearthed was the fact that Saddam Hussein’s regime was still actively pursuing WMD. Kay stated his team found that Iraqi senior leadership "had an intention to continue to pursue their WMD activities. That they, in fact, had a large number of WMD-related activities," and he offered the hypothesis that Iraqi scientists were "working on developing weapons or weapons concepts that they had not moved into actual production." This coupled with the uncovering of banned equipment such as a centrifuge used to enrich uranium for the purpose of weapons production (elements of this centrifuge was found buried in Mahdi Obeidi’s backyard, she an Iraqi nuclear scientist – how that can be construed as being open and honest with weapons inspectors I will never know), testimony from expatriated and captured Iraqi weapons scientists validating the contention that WMD development was chief among Hussein’s desires and banned weapons capabilities such as long-ranged missile systems in violation of UN sanctions can only lead to the conclusion that Saddam Hussein was throughout an imminent threat to the safety and security of the region, the United States and the world. Anyone who would contend otherwise could be characterized as being naive.

The idea that UN weapons inspections were working can be viewed as humorous. Not only couldn’t they find what Kay’s teams did, they wandered the Iraqi desert amongst mass graves filled with the victims of genocide and never had a clue. In the waning days of Hussein’s regime banned missile systems were uncovered by the UN inspectors. When questioned about these findings Hussein's answer was that he had "forgotten about them." Now I put it to you, if you had Hussein's totalitarian egotism would you "forget” about the most sophisticated weaponry in your arsenal, weaponry fully capable of carrying payloads that included bio-chemical and nuclear elements? To believe he wasn't practicing deception and obstructionism while trying to acquire the ultimate weaponry with which to dominate his foes would be again amazingly naive.

While hindsight is 20/20, we must all keep in mind that an overwhelming majority of legislators from both parties, including John Kerry who is now trying to say he levied conditions, voted to authorize the president to use force at his discretion based upon the very same information President Bush was afforded! This information came from not only our intelligence community but was corroborated by intelligence agencies from all over the world. It wasn't until later that questions about the British intelligence arose; the validity of that information is still being argued to this day. It could be argued successfully that all of the legislators who are now pointing fingers at the president rather than accepting their share of the culpability for accepting corrupt information from our faulty intelligence community are playing politics with the facts at hand. Of course these are the same legislators who approve spending bills and then blame the president for signing them saying that "he” is spending too much money.

You ask, where are the WMD? That question may never be answered although Kay alludes to information inferring they were moved in the final days before OIF into Syria. But you can bet on one thing, if the dissenters’ president, Bill Clinton, would have taken military action and found laboratories and illegal equipment, if he would have had Iraqi scientists attesting to the existence of banned weapons programs, if he would have uncovered the killing fields, rape rooms and torture chambers, Clinton would have been labeled a hero. Instead, and only for political gain, George W. Bush is being labeled a liar and a warmonger. This, even though the same people using the same information called for the same action at the same time.

Perhaps the liberals of this country can re-write history and have it accepted by their followers...why I couldn't tell you. But those who oppose killing fields, rape rooms and letting madmen acquire world-ending weapons technology do not have that luxury. Hussein is gone. The rape rooms are gone. The laboratories have been closed. The killing fields are no more and the world is a better and safer place because of it, no matter what the spin machine of the political left offers up.

The evidence of an impending tragedy was too great to ignore. I only wonder what the "ground zero” would have looked like had Hussein been able to acquire the final pieces of his maniacal puzzle. The thought of this horror could dwarf the tragedy at the World Trade Center. I hope we never, ever see that kind of nightmare become a reality.

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He is a contributing writer for The Washington Dispatch, GOPUSA, OpinionEditorials, Men’s News Daily, Canada Free Press & AmericanDaily. His pieces are regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O’Reilly Factor, The Kevin Matthews Radio Show (Chicago) and The Brad Messer Radio Show (San Antonio). His pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are occasionally featured in The Washington Times and The London Morning Paper as well as other national and international publications.