Wednesday, February 11, 2004
A Reader Rediscovers the Wisdom of Sen. Robert Byrd
A reader has reminded us to go back and re-read Robert Byrd's speeches on Iraq, starting in February of last year.
Now, after two years of playing to the cheap seats with his "either you're with us or with the terrorists" routine, George Bush is belatedly going back the world to try to stem the flow of nuclear technology. Of course he'll present it as a new challenge posed to the international community by his administration, but only viewers of Fox News will believe that.
In reality Bush has come all the way back to "police action" as the means to fight terrorism--which is where the U.S. and everyone else was before he abandoned it in favor of unilateral military action.
If the next smoking gun is indeed a mushroom cloud, as George Bush warned, will anyone hold his administration responsible for its decision to take the "War on Terrorism" to Iraq, while nuclear secrets were escaping from Afghanistan's neighbor?
Example from March 11, 2003 (pre-war):201k would add that while George Bush followed the neocon line into Iraq, Pakistanis were selling nuclear secrets. Americans should be very uncomfortable with this, given the prevalence of fundamentalist Islamic sentiment in the Pakistani military. And of course the fact that Osama bin Laden is hiding out somewhere around there.
"I believe this coming war is a grave mistake, not because Saddam Hussein does not deserve to be disarmed or driven from power, not because some of our allies object to war, but because Iraq does not pose an imminent threat to the security of the United States. There is no question that the United States has the military might to defeat Saddam Hussein, but we are on much shakier ground when it comes to the question of why this nation, under the current circumstances, is rushing to unleash the horrors of war on the people of Iraq.
In many corners of the world, the United States is seen as manufacturing a crisis in Iraq, not responding to one. Key members of the U.N. Security Council, including France and Russia, have vowed to veto any move to secure the imprimatur of the UN on war with Iraq. The UN weapons inspectors have pleaded for more time to do their work....
Mohamed El Baradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, threw cold water on a key assertion of the Bush Administration, that Iraq is actively pursuing a nuclear capability on two fronts -- by importing high-strength aluminum tubes which could be used as part of a centrifuge to produce enriched uranium and by attempting to buy uranium from Niger. Dr. El Baradei said the inspectors have found no evidence that Iraq is attempting to revive its nuclear weapons program, concluding that the aluminum tubes were for a rocket engine program, as Iraq claimed, and that the documents used to establish the Niger connection were faked."
Now, after two years of playing to the cheap seats with his "either you're with us or with the terrorists" routine, George Bush is belatedly going back the world to try to stem the flow of nuclear technology. Of course he'll present it as a new challenge posed to the international community by his administration, but only viewers of Fox News will believe that.
In reality Bush has come all the way back to "police action" as the means to fight terrorism--which is where the U.S. and everyone else was before he abandoned it in favor of unilateral military action.
If the next smoking gun is indeed a mushroom cloud, as George Bush warned, will anyone hold his administration responsible for its decision to take the "War on Terrorism" to Iraq, while nuclear secrets were escaping from Afghanistan's neighbor?
