Posted on 09/24/2002 1:50:31 PM PDT by Shermy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A fierce attack on President Bush ( news - web sites)'s Iraq policy issued by former Vice President Al Gore ( news - web sites) could help galvanize U.S. opposition to a new Gulf war ( news - web sites) while serving as a launching pad for Gore's probable 2004 presidential campaign, analysts said on Tuesday.
In a speech in San Francisco, the defeated 2000 Democratic presidential nominee on Monday laid out a scathing critique of Bush's Iraq policy.
Pollster John Zogby said Gore's message was "very well timed."
"Gore stepped in just as it appeared that pro-war sentiment would go virtually unchallenged in Congress and in the country," Zogby said. "There will be an anti-war movement that grows out of this."
Democrats in the U.S. Congress, acutely aware the mid-term elections that will decide control of both houses of Congress are only six weeks away, have been wary of speaking out against Bush on Iraq. Their main tactic has been to try to change the subject to domestic issues but with scant success.
Bush has been pressing Congress to debate Iraq and endorse his policy within the next couple of weeks before lawmakers leave Washington for the election campaign rather than waiting until mid-November.
"Gore put forward some legitimate and substantive arguments which might make it possible for the country to have a real debate. That makes him stand out among the various potential Democratic presidential candidates," said Steven Wayne, a political scientist at Georgetown University.
Gore, who as a senator supported the 1991 Gulf War, laid out several objections to Bush's determination to remove President Saddam Hussein ( news - web sites) from power, if necessary by force and with the United States acting alone.
He said a war against Iraq distracted attention from the war against terrorism and the need to stabilize Afghanistan ( news - web sites). It also alienated and frightened U.S. allies, would cost billions of dollars and might leave Iraq so unstable and disorganized it would become even more dangerous to the United States.
'WORSE DANGER'
"The resulting chaos in the aftermath of a military victory with Iraq could easily pose a far greater danger to the United States than does Saddam," Gore said.
A number of analysts said on Tuesday the speech marked the beginning of Gore's quest for the presidency in 2004.
"He is asserting his leadership of the Democratic Party and kicking off his 2004 campaign. If the Iraq war does go sour, Gore will become the 'I told you so' guy and will look like a prophet," said American University historian Allan Lichtman.
Polls show the administration has made substantial progress in recent weeks in convincing Americans it was vital to rid the world of Saddam, who Bush says is developing weapons of mass destruction and backing international terrorism.
But only around 52 percent of Democrats support the war, leaving Gore giving a voice to a substantial constituency within his own party, many frustrated with the timidity of their congressional leaders.
"Gore is trying to present himself as the only Democrat with backbone and the guts to take on the president," said Tom DeLuca, a political scientist with Fordham University in New York.
When voters were asked if they would still support a war with Iraq if it involved substantial U.S. casualties and resulted in U.S. troops remaining as an occupying power for a substantial period of time, support fell well below 50 percent, according to Zogby.
Still, around 60 percent of Americans now seem to support the idea of toppling Saddam, even though they would prefer to see Bush secure United Nations ( news - web sites) backing and go into combat with some allies alongside him, polls show.
And all the war talk seems to have helped Bush and the Republicans in the buildup to the mid-term elections.
"The Bush administration has succeeded in shifting the debate from domestic issues where they are weak to Iraq and Republicans have benefited," said Democratic consultant and pollster Jennifer Laszlo.
"For instance, yesterday's news that the Nasdaq stock index hit a six-year low was pretty much buried by the president's latest comments on Iraq," she said.
Pollster Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center said Gore was taking a substantial political risk with the speech even if events proved him right.
He recalled that opponents to the Vietnam War did not fare well with voters even though that conflict turned into a disastrous defeat for the United States. At the height of the conflict, President Richard Nixon trounced dovish Democrat George McGovern in the 1972 presidential election.
"Gore is playing risky pool," Kohut said.
US Vice-President Al Gore has told Iraqi opposition politicians that the United States remains committed to the overthrow of President Saddam Hussein.Meeting a delegation from the Iraqi National Congress (INC), he also reiterated the administration's view that the Iraqi leader should be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The Clinton administration is trying to beef up the INC after nearly 10 years of sanctions on Iraq have brought the world no closer to bringing down the Iraqi leader.
It has allocated $8m this year to the INC to help to re-build the organisation.
I know a wide variety of just plain American folks - seniors, young people (twenties), blacks, whites, etc. The young mother who lives next door said to me "We must kill all terrorists because I want my children to grow up free and safe". We all agree - we don't want to see America attacked again.
This is Gore's Hail Mary play. He threw the ball way downfield in hopes that an American defeat in Iraq wll catch it and bring him the presidency.
As for timing, it could not have been worse for the dims. It keeps the issue on the front burner and it begs one to question if they support Gore's position on Iraq. We are going to see A LOT of dims tap dancing in the next few weeks -- thanks to Gore's speech. Behind the scenes the dims are probably telling him to shut up. I consider this a gift to the Republicans.
Oh, I think this issue will resonate--resonate with that cartoon "Claaaaannnnnnnnngggggggg" of a frying pan hitting the side of Wile E. Coyote's head....
The problem is that his most ardent supporters, the New York Times and Dan Rather, gave him two-column inches on the front page and 45 seconds of airtime, respectively.
If that is all the support Gore can muster from his biggest megaphones, methinks he is just about finished.
Of course, his lack of oratorical skills didn't help either. The only time he is effective and persuasive is when he is handing out "our" money.
"very well timed." ????
Timed to clash with the 67% public approval rating for President Bush's position on Iraq?
Timed to keep Iraq on the front burner politically when the Democrats desperately want to change the subject in time for the Nov elections?
Timed to be an antiwar speech that is immediately outdated and classed by a 55 page report on the dangers of Iraq by PM Tony Blair?
Gore's timing couldn't be worse. He's a klutz.
No... not a frying pan. Think "anvil". If I'm not mistaken, I can hear it in the distance... whistling as it plummets earthward towards Al's black-painted bald spot.
Too bad it wasn't "very well honest."
Just about everything Gore said can be shown to be the exact opposite of what he spewed in '91 and all through his 8 years of Vice President. What a hypocrite! But then, he's a Democrat and the bulk of Democrats are hypocrites and political opportunists.
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.