Today, The New York Times published a piece titled "20 Years On, a Question Lingers About Iraq: Why Did the U.S. Invade?" The article listed all sorts of reasons why the U.S. went to war with a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 Saudi terrorist attack, but it neglected to mention how the paper acted as a mouthpiece for the Bush administration's lies and propaganda.
The Times' own Judith Miller was a key player in spreading the false narrative of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Miller's reporting was not only uncritical but also actively promoted the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld agenda. And yet, The Times seems to have conveniently forgotten this fact as it continues to report on the Iraq War.
It's not just Miller, either. The Times as a whole failed to ask tough questions and challenge the administration's claims in the lead-up to the war. Instead, it acted as a cheerleader for the war effort, helping to create the false impression that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States.
So, while The Times may now be asking "Why Did the U.S. Invade?" it's worth remembering that The Times was complicit in the lies and propaganda that led to the war, and it should be held accountable for its role in this tragic chapter in American history.