Are We Better Off: In His Own Words

Richard Perle is widely credited as the “intellectual architect” of the Iraq invasion. But with the clarity of hindsight, it’s clear that the former Defense Policy Board member trafficked in more than faulty intelligence; he also put forward a number of prognostications that turned out to be, well, off target.

Photo: AFP Imageforum

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.


 

“Iraq is a very wealthy country. Enormous oil reserves. They can finance, largely finance,
the reconstruction of their own country. And I have no doubt that they will.”

PBS interview
July 11, 2002

 

“We are not talking about a massive invasion along the lines of 1991. We’re talking
about a much more modest effort in which the United States would assist Iraqis in freeing
their country.”

—Washington Post interview, August 22, 2002

 

“UN weapons inspectors are being seriously deceived…. It reminds me of the way
the Nazis hoodwinked Red Cross officials inspecting the concentration camp at Theresienstadt
in 1944. The SS even organized a phony concert to show what a wonderful new home the Jews had.
But Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has MORE evidence of secret weapons dumps.”

Writing in the News of the World, February 23, 2003

 

“The predictions of those who opposed this war can be discarded like spent cartridges.
You remember them? We will kill hundreds of thousands. We will create thousands of new terrorists.
The Arab world will rise up and set the region aflame. Tony Blair and George Bush knew better.”

Writing
in the
News of the World, April 13, 2003

 

“Relax, celebrate victory.”

Writing in USA Today, May 2, 2003

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate