Replies

Tommy keeps saying there are answers he needs before the Iraq action. What are the questions?

SEN. TOM DASCHLE: What I hope will happen over the course of the next several weeks is that the President will be more forthcoming in terms of the information that he believes warrants U.S. intervention in Iraq. What new information exists? What threat can be quantified? What has changed in recent months or years? What will be the reaction of our allies? How much will it cost? If we change regimes, who will be in the new regime, and has that been thought through? Those and many other questions I think are ones that we have to explore very carefully.

PBS

SEN. TOM DASCHLE: What I hope will happen over the course of the next several weeks is that the President will be more forthcoming in terms of the information that he believes warrants U.S. intervention in Iraq. What new information exists? What threat can be quantified? What has changed in recent months or years? What will be the reaction of our allies? How much will it cost? If we change regimes, who will be in the new regime, and has that been thought through? Those and many other questions I think are ones that we have to explore very carefully.

Funny, I do not recall reading about Congress asking these type of questions before going to war with Japan. Could it be if you wait for your enemy to destroy you, all other points are moot?

What has changed in recent months or years?

Obviously nothing but the administration, Tom, which accounts for the changing of your mind.

"Any delay would have given Saddam Hussein time to reconstitute his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and undermine international support for our efforts." Tom Daschle December 16, 1998 press conference supporting President Clintons actions against Iraq.

We know all we need to know. Saddam is working on getting nuclear weapons. He has chemical and biological weapons. He supports terrorism, has given money to Bin Laden in the past.

We are in too great a risk with weapons of mass destruction in the hands of one who supports terrorism. Allowing terrorists to get their hands on WMD means death to millions of Americans in one strike. The world has changed so that now terrorists can deliver massive deaths to an enemy if they can get their hands on the materials or weapons. They now can get their hands on them.

Now - Saddam refuses to allow inspectors and will probably refuse to abide by the U.N. resolutions to insure the safety of other nations.

What is the purpose of allowing him to hold the world hostage or slaughter millions?

We have the right to protect ourselves. We must or we will no longer have an America.

SEN. TOM DASCHLE: ... What new information exists?

3,000 American noncombatants died last Sept. 11 in a premeditated attack upon American soil. The ringleader of the attack has been known to have consorted with Saddam, through their respective representatives. Saddam continues to thumb his nose at 16 relevant UN resolutions.

What threat can be quantified?

Tally up the monetary and human cost of the Iran-Iraq war, the 1991 invasion of Kuwait, and 9/11/01 for starters.

What has changed in recent months or years?

See above. Add to this reports that Saddam is close to one or more nukes. Consider how indiscriminately he lobbed scuds at Israel and our troops during the Gulf war. This should indicate to any sensible person the manner in which he or his clients are willing to use nukes.

What will be the reaction of our allies?

Who cares? They'll jump on board, or they'll never be with us.

How much will it cost?

Who cares? We'll pay for it.

If we change regimes, who will be in the new regime, and has that been thought through?

Who cares, as long as our safety and that of the rest of the world is safeguarded from Iraqi-sponsored aggression?

Those and many other questions I think are ones that we have to explore very carefully.

Those are your answers. Now explore to your heart's content. But do it quick. Our lives and our country as we know it are at stake.