A Dishonest War (Ted Kennedy alert)

Washington Post ^ | 01/18/04 | Edward M. Kennedy

[Pokey78]

Of the many issues competing for attention in this new and defining year, one is of a unique order of magnitude: President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. The facts demonstrate how dishonest that decision was. As former Treasury secretary Paul H. O'Neill recently confirmed, the debate over military action began as soon as President Bush took office. Some felt Saddam Hussein could be contained without war. A month after the inauguration, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said: "We have kept him contained, kept him in his box." The next day, he said tellingly that Hussein "has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction."

The events of Sept. 11, 2001, gave advocates of war the opening they needed. They tried immediately to tie Hussein to al Qaeda and the terrorist attacks. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld created an Office of Special Plans in the Pentagon to analyze the intelligence for war and bypass the traditional screening process. Vice President Cheney relied on intelligence from Iraqi exiles and put pressure on intelligence agencies to produce the desired result.

[Republican Wildcat]

So if a rapist is loose in your neighborhood, and a murderer is captured, you would condemn the capture of the murderer, saying "The capture of the murderer has done virtually nothing to keep the rapist from striking again" and therefore, who cares that the murderer was captured, right? It hasn't helped anything.

[Republican Wildcat]

He was preceded in death by his only child, MaryJo.

That is sad.

[Republican Wildcat]

[Ranger]

I'm saying that I want to be told why we go to war by the President in an honest manner. And I will repeat. OBL is not in Iraq. He is active and has had an entire year to regroup. He will be knocking on our door again.

[Republican Wildcat]

Why don't you try answering my question instead of trying to dodge the issue, eh? Just repeating the same thing over again that bin Laden is not Hussein does not make your argument any stronger than it was the first time.

[LexBaird]

Ted Kennedy, the day you left a woman to drown in your car...

Bravo! Well said.

This fat pig got his job through nepotism, avoided trial through political blackmail, and has remained a Senator for 46 years by waving the bloody shirts of his murdered kin. In all justice, he should have spent those 46 years in prison.

The wrong Kennedys keep dying.

[LexBaird]

Bin Laden isn't in Iraq. Our attack on Iraq has done virtually nothing to prevent al-Qaeda from attacking us again.

You've got a problem understanding the scale and scope of this war. It isn't a war vs Al Qeida. It's a war vs terrorism.

If we were able to eliminate every Al Qeida member tomorrow, we would still be facing Hammas, Al Asaq, resurgent Taliban, etc. The hydra cannot be killed by chopping off its heads. You have to cauterize the lifeblood - money and safe havens.

So far, we have shut off Afghanistan, Iraq and perhaps Libya, leaving Syria and Iran in a really precarious position. The current strongholds of radical Islam are being fragmented from one another and defeated in detail.

[Ranger]

You've got a problem understanding the scale and scope of this war. It isn't a war vs Al Qeida. It's a war vs terrorism.

I have a problem with an unspecific war on 'terrorism', defined at whim by unelected officials in the Pentagon. The last I checked this was a democracy where the president was accountable to the people and the congress alone had the power to declare war.

[Ranger]

I don't know what skin you have in this war, but I suspect not very much, otherwise, you'd be more circumspect about war and less bellicose.

[LexBaird]

The last I checked this was a democracy where the president was accountable to the people and the congress alone had the power to declare war.

First, we are a representative Republic, not a democracy.

Second, Congress voted authorization for military action. I wish they had had the balls to do their duty and declare the war officially, instead of weaseling their way out, but there was a vote that legitimizes the military actions. If Congress disagrees, they can always withhold funding.

Third, the President will be held to account next November. The people can approve or disapprove then.

[HankReardon]

Do some research, al Queida trained south of Baghdad in a 707 fuselage on taking over a commercial airliner with box cutter knives. We KNOW Saddam had chemical weapons, we KNOW Saddam and al Queida have the same goal, kill Americans. Should we have waited until Saddam passed on chemical weapons and terrorist delivered them to a major American city before we took him out? Is this unthinkable? So was flying commercial airliners into WTO before 9-11. From now on, any nation that openly declares themselves as the enemy of the United States should be taken at their word and taken out immediately. It's called protecting and defending American lives, some of you need to get on the right side of all this.

[Elkiejg]

The wrong Kennedys keep dying.

BINGO!! Post of the day!!

[Ranger]

agreed

[Ranger]

There may or may not have been a tenuous relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda. There are certainly links now as Chechens and others are in that area attacking our troops. A stronger case between an al-Qaeda and Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or Iran could easily have been made. And when you add it all up, we are farther away from getting OBL now than we were a year ago.

[HankReardon]

Keep rolling, you are either with us or against us, Afghanistan, Iraq, that's a damn good start to a long war.

[MarkL]

Well, if anyone knows dishonesty, it would certainly be Teddy K!

Mark

[Ranger]

Afghanistan, Iraq, that's a damn good start to a long war

Expect Bush to face much tighter scrutiny on his next declared adventure in war, even from this pushbutton congress.

[HankReardon]

This is not "Bush's adventure in war" this is the President of the United States doing his duty and defending America. I know it's different than the previous 8 years.

[Ranger]

The administration took great liberties with the truth linking OBL to Saddam. If that weasel Clinton had done it we would be seeking his impeachment. We both have been willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt to date. As a result, now we are handing over power in Iraq based on our election schedule, not on Iraq's ability to manage it, hence the obsession with June handover regardless of the method. Its policy for politics. Every day OBL gets stronger. We need to find him and kill him.

[HankReardon]

Tell me how the Bush Administration linked OBL to Saddam. I can do it, I don't recall the Bush Administration doing it though. If the U.S. miltary was sent into Afghanistan to take out the Taliban before 9-11, think of the outrage to that "Bush adventure in war". Think of the thousands of lives that would have been saved and the billions of dollars not lost. The U.S. does not need to await the attack by her enemies in order to be "justified". get on the right side!