Kennedy's remarks about war motivations hit a new low

suntimes.com ^ | October 18, 2003 | THOMAS ROESER

[Qwinn]

Saudi Arabia: Chances of internal reform: Actually considerable. It was judged that alternate forms of pressure (including Iraq itself) could create significant change there. This has proven in retrospect to be correct. They are now holding elections - an astounding event. Also, the biggest beef Saudis had with us was our troops stationed on their soil. Those troops were there to protect Saudi Arabia from Saddam at the Saudi monarch's request - no other reason. Those troops have now been relocated.

North Korea: Chances of internal reform: Nil. Thanks to Herr Klinton, they've had a decade to make nukes, plus they have the largest (or very close to it) standing army in the world, and Seoul within a couple of miles for their taking. Almost any move to deal with NK would mean the loss of SK. Plus, NK is supported directly by China. In other words, it would be a thousand times more problematic than Iraq.

Iraq: Chances of internal reform: Nil. Showed clear signs of soon becoming another NK. Countries willing to -directly- back Saddam - AT THIS TIME, none. Countries indirectly helping Saddam - numerous, under the guise of the Oil For Food debacle. Don't attack, and watch U.S. reputation continue to deteriorate ANYWAY as every Lefty organization on the planet continued to pin starvation on Iraq as a result of the U.S.'s embargo, not Saddam.
Wisdom of allowing that status quo to remain - in the negatives.

People who try to paint foreign policy with a "one-size-fits-all" standard annoy me.

Qwinn

[Calvin Locke]

... some of the media ...

D@mn! I forgot to set the vcr to tape Couric ripping the swimmer a new one. Anybody else see it?

Umm, she did use her piercing wit and analysis to defend logic and truth, didn't she?

[Calvin Locke]

I wonder how Kennedy thinks he's helping the country ....

The same way his father did by vocally supporting Hitler while Ambassador to England.

[cwb]

Shh! That's supposed to be a secret:)

[niteowl77]

Seeing so much resort to libertarian and/or populist phraseology, I can do little more than consider you to be one of the two - or at least someone who plays one on TV - therefore no arguments I can make are likely to change you (those particular viewpoints often coincide with critically high self-justification levels). Perhaps you are a liberal (in the pejorative sense) trolling on a Saturday, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that.

Be that as it may, I'll cut to the chase and say that for whatever reasons you may enumerate, you have a sufficiently dark vision of George Bush to place him in moral equivalency with William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, and that makes it impossible for me to take you seriously any more than I now take Patrick J. Buchanan.

Good day.

[Go Gordon]

I was just moved by a FReeper that equated patriotism with a blind devotion to the president's policies. That is dangerous.

Maybe the Freeper that motivated you, actually understands that we are at war with Muslim fundamentalists. Maybe that Freeper understands that the fight is better fought on their soil, not ours. Maybe that Freeper has more information than you do, regarding the links between Saddam and terrorists groups - INCLUDING Al Quaeda.

Maybe that Freeper does enough homework and reading to know that Biological weapons materials have already been found in Iraq, and 20 previously undisclosed bio laboratories were uncovered. Maybe that Freeper also knows that there are over 130 munitions sites around Iraq, some as large as 50 square miles and that Saddam used to store his chemical munitions together with conventional munitions, oftentimes without clearly marking them. Oh, BTW, we've only inspected 10 of the 130+ sites.

Maybe that Freeper also knows of the connections between known Al Quaeda members and the fact that Osama Bin Laden visited Iraq and met with Iraqui officials in 1998 - after the inspectors were kicked out. Maybe that Freeper knows what Salmon Pak is, and how it was used to train terrorists in hijackings.

I could go on and on, but what may be more helpful for everyone, is to hear what YOUR solution would have been over the last 2 years. DIssent is fine, but what should have been done? Whats your solution? Or are you just a whinning Monday morning quarterback? Besides, this think isn't over yet. Syria and Iran will be dealt with in the future. As for Saudi Arabia, are you really suggesting that we wipe out their entire population? Is that part of what your solution would have been over the last two years? I'm very interested to hear your response.

Respectfully....GG

[Go Gordon]

Great post (#51)

BTW - And just who is going to explain to those families why we didn't act when we had the chance?

Wasn't Bush blamed for 9/11 by the RATS - What did he know and when did he know it accustations.

[OldFriend]

Kennedy and Albright singing from the same hymnbook.

It's the McAuliff version, circa 2000

[cwb]

Thanks. And yes Bush was blamed. That's what makes these libs such hypocrites: They wanted him to act preemptively "before" 9/11, and yet obstruct him from doing just that after 9/11. Can you imagine their outrage had we begun profiling Arab men between the ages of 18-35 or took the war to Afghanistan BEFORE 9/11? The so-called intelligence "chatter" surronding 9/11 was much less specific than everything we knew about Saddam. Just look at their reactions to these policies after the attack...as they still blamed Bush. Liberals have positioned themselves purely as obstructionists and oppurtunists to take advantage of any circumstance.

[Go Gordon]

Good point. According to liberals, Bush should have pre-emptively taken out Osama and the Taliban before 9/11. He shouldn't have gone after Iraq after 9/11, but he should pre-emptively take care of North Korea, which has nuclear weapons. I'm still confused over what the liberals want the US to do with Syria and Iran. My guesss, is that they will wait for Bush to do something, then condemn the action. If Bush does nothing before the next election, they'll complain that he should have done something. Typical partisan liberal wackiness.

[JustPiper]

Bump!

[ImpBill]

Censure the guy that just got the Bush (SR) award for excellence in public service?

[InterceptPoint]

As I pointed out on another thread:

Listen to bin Laden and listen to Kennedy. Can you tell the difference?

[Maria S]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I really think Hillary Clinton is feeding Teddy those lines. They both know he can pretty well say anything and get away with it...he'll be re-elected by the Mass. voters as long as he keeps running (sometimes I DO wonder about people in NY and Mass.!), he does have stature in the Senate, and the liberal media WILL continue to report his words. Seems like she's found a reasonably useful mouthpiece through Kennedy!

[StriperSniper]

Seems like she's found a reasonably useful mouthpiece through Kennedy!

Well she sure wore out little Tommy Dashole, I'm concerned about him. ;-)

[Temple Owl]

But don't forget, he was the inventer of the waitress sandwich. He should get credit for that. I suggest the much coveted Mary Jo Kopecne award.