Posted on 02/19/2004 3:43:19 AM PST by Eurotwit
Let me ask but the war, because I know these are all students and a lot of guys the age of these students are fighting over there and cleaning up over there, and they’re doing the occupation.
Were we right to go to this war alone, basically without the Europeans behind us? Was that something we had to do?
EDWARDS: I think that we were right to go. I think we were right to go to the United Nations. I think we couldn’t let those who could veto in the Security Council hold us hostage.
And I think Saddam Hussein, being gone is good. Good for the American people, good for the security of that region of the world, and good for the Iraqi people.
MATTHEWS: If you think the decision, which was made by the president, when basically he saw the French weren’t with us and the Germans and the Russians weren’t with us, was he right to say, “We’re going anyway”?
EDWARDS: I stand behind my support of that, yes.
MATTHEWS: You believe in that?
EDWARDS: Yes.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about-Since you did support the resolution and you did support that ultimate solution to go into combat and to take over that government and occupy that country. Do you think that you, as a United States Senator, got the straight story from the Bush administration on this war? On the need for the war? Did you get the straight story?
EDWARDS: Well, the first thing I should say is I take responsibility for my vote. Period. And I did what I did based upon a belief, Chris, that Saddam Hussein’s potential for getting nuclear capability was what created the threat. That was always the focus of my concern. Still is the focus of my concern.
So did I get misled? No. I didn’t get misled.
MATTHEWS: Did you get an honest reading on the intelligence?
EDWRADS: But now we’re getting to the second part of your question.
I think we have to get to the bottom of this. I think there’s clear inconsistency between what’s been found in Iraq and what we were told.
And as you know, I serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee. So it wasn’t just the Bush administration. I sat in meeting after meeting after meeting where we were told about the presence of weapons of mass destruction. There is clearly a disconnect between what we were told and what, in fact, we found there.
MATTHEWS: If you knew last October when you had to cast an aye or nay vote for this war, that we would be unable to find weapons of mass destruction after all these months there, would you still have supported the war?
EDWARDS: It wouldn’t change my views. I said before, I think that the threat here was a unique threat. It was Saddam Hussein, the potential for Saddam getting nuclear weapons, given his history and the fact that he started the war before.
MATTHEWS: Do you feel now that you have evidence in your hands that he was on the verge of getting nuclear weapons?
EDWARDS: No, I wouldn’t go that far.
MATTHES: What would you say?
EDWARDS: What I would say is there’s a decade long pattern of an effort to get nuclear capability, from the former Soviet Union, trying to get access to scientists...
MATTHEWS: What about Africa?
EDWARDS: ... trying to get-No. I don’t think so. At least not from the evidence.
MATTHEWS: Were you misled by the president in the State of the Union address on the argument that Saddam Hussein was trying get uranium from Niger?
EDWARDS: I guess the answer to that is no.
I did not put a lot of stock in that.
MATTHEWS: But you didn’t believe-But you weren’t misled?
EDWARDS: No, I was not misled because I didn’t put a lot of stock in to it begin with.
As I said before, I think what happened here is, for over a decade, there is strong, powerful evidence, which I still believe is true, that Saddam Hussein had been trying to get nuclear capability. Either from North Korea, from the former Soviet Union, getting access to scientists, trying to get access to raw fissile material. I don’t-that I don’t have any question about.
MATTHEWS: The United States has had a long history of nonintervention, of basically taking the “don’t tread on me and if you don’t we’ll leave you alone.” We broke with that tradition for Iraq. What is your standard for breaking with tradition of nonintervention?
EDWARDS: When somebody like Saddam Hussein presents a direct threat to the security of the American people and, in this case, the security of a region of the world that I think is critical.
MATTHEWS: A direct threat to us. What was it? Just to get that down. What is it? Knowing everything you know now, what was the direct threat this guy posed to us here in America?
EDWARDS: You didn’t get let me finish. There were two pieces to that. I said both a direct threat to us and a direct threat to a region of the world that is incredibly dangerous.
And I think that with Saddam Hussein, they’ve got nuclear capability, it would have changed the dynamic in that part of the world entirely. And as a result, would have created a threat to the American people. So that’s what I think the threat was.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Not that I'll be putting his bumper sticker on my car anytime soon...
Well, for a sleazy trial lawyer, appears you've got some slight degree of honor in you. (He also must know that once the Bush campaign fires their engines up they're gonna steamroll everyone on the Iraq issue)
What is this fat, no-ratings sissy talking about? American non-intervention in the Spanish American War? Mexican War? WWI? WW2? Korea? Nam? Grenada? IraqI? What planet is fatboy living on?
When this was used in a simpler news world, it looked like everyone came upon the thought innocently and the folks at home were fooled...
The media whores who support this criminal manipulation designed to look like "truth" have been eviserated by the 24 hour news cycle that sees the "word of the year" coming up way to often to be just a coincedence.....it becomes clear that this is an organized ploy of unscruplous people that are willing to do anything to regain the power they've lost
Welcome to credibility
The strongest point in GWB's arsenal is that people believe him and trust him, (unlike the bozo who last occupied the White House) so of course, the democrats see that this must be attacked.....
The problem with gravitas in the past, and credibility now is that it gets driven into the ground by so many different media types and dem politicians, that it becomes clear to the folks at home that this isn't anything more than a campaign message, and it gets ignored becausethey do not like being manipulated.
Then the democrats walk around after the election wondering what happened and why there are now more GOP senators than before.....
Until they get rid of the terry's and the beasts, they are doomed
Just like the jobs lie.....America is changing and the jobs aren't being lost, more and more Americans are moving into the work force as Self Employed, possibily the coolest way to work....the democrats just leave out the fact that by measuring housholds instead of payrolls we are gaining not loosing, and for not making this point LOUDER I blame the RNC, not the crooks on the other side....
Come on Ed...you've started strong, now lets grow a pair and attack the same way.....
And this year's word for the GOP, to be used everywhere, should be LIARS
Of course Edwards voted against funding the Iraqi occupation, but still he seems to make sense.
Edwards does well among independents and Republicans, even with his class warfare rhetoric. I find his anti-free trade positions troubling for the future of the economy. Still I like the guy, (is it all a lawyer trick?)
I think Edwards will be the next Democrat president (in 2008).
Here we go again, the president did not say Niger in the State of the Union address
The fun part of this is what he is doing now is trying to draw some differences between himself and Kerry to see if he can steal the nomination-- and if he gets that traction, you will see Kerry start to adopt the same positions to remove the distinctions. So we are likely to see Kerry twisting himself into inconsistency again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.