KEYES: Well, the truth is, the question is raised as if we have a choice. We either fight the war against terror, or the terrorists kill us. We must fight that war by carrying the war to the enemy.
What President Bush did, in going into Iraq, was take a situation where there was a probability that we were going to be attacked with weapons of mass destruction developed by Saddam Hussein, handed off to the terrorist network that he was part of, for he had provided payments, for instance, to Hamas--they work with Al Qaeda in the training camps, and so forth--all of this, he understood.
What probability was there, when he got that information? Was it fifty percent? Forty percent? Thirty percent? Ten? Well, what probability would you like, that there is going to be a chemical or biological attack against Chicago, that a weapon of mass destruction will go off and destroy the Loop?
What G. W. Bush did was what any responsible president would have to do. He acted in order to reduce that probability to zero, because when you're dealing with the situation we face right now, that is the only chance you want the American people to take.
So I think that we had no choice, and we have no choice now but to confront the terrorists where they live, to attack them before they attack us, to disrupt their lines of supply, their financial lines of supply, their training camps, and to make it clear to state sponsors of terrorism--such as Saddam Hussein was--that we are not going to tolerate their activities, and that none of them are going to be left alone.
It has clearly had an effect. Libya has backed off. Syria is talking a better game. Others are taking the lesson of our resolve, and that lesson is, even now, saving Americans from terrible disaster. It was a necessary decision, and that's what counts.
A lot of black folk are in denail about it. I've had debates with some on the streets of DC during the MArch for Life. The most common reaction is, "Really, nah I don't believe you." And my answer ia always the same. Why would I lie?