Cheney says U.S. can wage war without global OK

Washington Times ^ | 10/11/03 | Bill Sammon

[kattracks]

Vice President Dick Cheney yesterday ridiculed the notion that America must enlist the support of every ally before defending itself, saying such a policy would have been disastrous in Iraq.

"Ultimately, America must be in charge of her own national security," Mr. Cheney told the Heritage Foundation.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

BTTT for US sovereignty.

[ApesForEvolution]

Volley BTTT for American sovereignty...

[Support Free Republic]

	God Bless Those who Protect our Liberty --- Past, Present and Future.
Please visit the FR Fundraiser

[droberts]

...such a policy would have been disastrous in Iraq.

Exactly, but then that's the point.

[ex-Texan]

*Bravo* ! for Dick Cheney.

[clee1]

The country has gone truely mad when the DemonRats can, with a straight face, look into a TV camera and state that our security/soverignty is dependent on permission from the UN.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Cheney is awesome in his presentation of the logic of the Bush War On Terror policy with respect to Iraq!

[Brian S]

Russia also expressed the same notion just the other day.

Preemption "rules the day"...! :)

GWB is a Foreign Policy "Super-Star". If only Reagan could have had him "on staff"...

[concerned about politics]

"To accept the view that action by America and our allies can be stopped by the objection of foreign governments that may not feel threatened is to confer undue power on them while leaving the rest of us powerless to act in our own defense," he added.

That's what the Decloration of Independace is about. We're free from European rule now. (Oh, sorry. Was I being politically incorrect?)

[concerned about politics]

BTTT
I like Cheney.

[concerned about politics]

"Those who declined to support the liberation of Iraq would not deny the evil of Saddam Hussein's regime," he said. "They must concede, however, that had their own advice been followed, that regime would rule Iraq today."

Never vote Democrat, because surrender is not an option.

[MJY1288]

The problem for Russia is that they are in no position to deploy a conventional force to a location away from their Continent, that leaves them with the Nuclear option, and that's doesn't fall in the catagory of a precision strike that limits the loss of innocent life and shields them from international condemnation and isolation.

Not too mention that the Bush doctrine of pre-emption is nothing new, it's just defined a little better since 9/11 and considering that every nation on the face of the earth has every right to confront any clear and present danger before it has the opportunity to deliver a lethal attack

[risk]

Meanwhile there are threats we're not addressing. I'm waiting for us to stop talking and actually take the next steps.

[Let's Roll]

If they really believe we should literally trust our lives to Kofi, than not only should they not be President, they should not even be free on their own cognizance.

[Brian S]

and that's doesn't fall in the catagory of a precision strike that limits the loss of innocent life and shields them from international condemnation and isolation.

What a load of crock...

Like we were concerned with "loss of innocent life and international condemnation"?

As much as you may care to "parse it"...the US attack on Iraq opens the door for any Country, with the means, to attack any other country as a "pre-emptive" measure for whatever "reason" that they might "dream up".

Granted Russia may not be capable today to deploy a conventional force to distant lands, Putin is working mighttly to rectifying that situation.

The Russian Oil influence in world markets will be quite beneficial for ole "Pooty-poot".

[SoDak]

I've been a big Cheney fan, I wish we'd hear from him more often.

[MJY1288]

Do you really think that our invasion of Iraq is the first pre-emptive strike we have made?

If so... please explain what international approval we had to bomb the shit of Yugoslavia, or conduct raids in Samolia with the intended goal of capturing or killing it's leader.

Just in case you have forgotten, Iraq signed a cease fire agreement with us in 1991 and violated every single demand of that agreement for over 12 years. So this label of pre-emtion you and our leftist media have placed on our justified invasion of Iraq is rediculous and a prime example of how the left can manipulate those who can't see beyond this mornings breakfast.

Our enemies are quite aware of where we are weak, and it's disinformation that the spineless left is so eagerly willing to swallow and those who the left can convince to ignore the obvious and take the path least resistance.

I'm sorry bud, but I refuse to swallow the crap the left wants us to believe about this war, way too many of our bravest died in the Gulf War for me to believe we should ignore the multiple violations of the agreement our soldiers sacrificed their leves for

[MJY1288]

Get a load of this nonsense....

talk about revisionist history????

[katana]

This, my friends, is a winning argument for 2004. Let the democrats try to argue to the American public that we must satisfy the demands of France and Germany before we kill those who need killing and see which way the votes go.

Bring it on!