New Memos Detail Early Plans for Invading Iraq

It's about friggin' time an article like this one from today's LA Times appeared in the US press. It ties together DSM I, DSM II, and the six new memos recently leaked in a fair and succinct manner.

The Times doesn't blurt "Bush lied!" in the headline, but that's not what war critics have been asking for. If you listened to people like Dana Milbank and Michael Kinsley, though, you'd get a different impression.

See also: Paul Woodward's take on "How to read the memoranda from Downing Street" and Raw Story's Path of War Timeline. The latter dovetails nicely with Benedict@Large's old Cakegate timeline, which dates back to Summer 2003 and suggests that, yes, it's long been possible to piece together the story of the Bush/Blair determination to topple Hussein, no matter what.