HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Oct. 8, 2004 By now most thinking and sensible individuals realize that the data given to President George W. Bush (by the Director of the CIA and the intelligence agencies and leaders of other countries), in regards to Iraqi WMDs was flawed. The evidence presented to the president was that the threat from Saddam Hussein’s WMDs was a real and present danger to the United States. In regards to our finding said weapons of mass destruction, CIA Chief George Tenant told President Bush “It’s a slam dunk!” Both Houses of Congress (including Sen. John Kerry) saw the same information as President Bush and agreed with the president. Based upon the intelligence information given to President Bush, and subsequently to Congress, both Houses agreed it was necessary to give the president the authorization to wage war against Iraq. It was a difficult yet logical decision, toward beginning a solution to the intensely difficult problem. However, as we know, this decision has not remained (logical or otherwise) in the minds of the liberal democrats; not at all. This is election season and the Dems were and are determined to throw everything available and at their disposal at President Bush. To them, anything is fair, the safety and continuation of our country will just have to take a back seat to their run for power and any remaining logic has been placed on the back-burner. To top it off, John Kerry is still saying the “President misled us regarding weapons of mass destruction”. Kerry and his surrogates have even told us that President Bush outright lied about Iraqi WMDs. Prior to making his decision to vote for or against going to war with Iraq, John Kerry saw the same intelligence information (as did the president) and he voted for it. Of course, Kerry now claims that he agreed to the president’s waging war but, only if he followed certain guidelines. The guidelines were followed. Congress signed the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq". In its authorization, Congress stated: “The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq”. In regards to (2), the ‘relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq’, WERE followed by the US. The problem was that the UN was not enforcing its own [prior] resolutions and sanctions. So, we affected the enforcement for them. There is no ‘Kerry nuance’ here. As UN leaders are currently embroiled in the Iraq oil-for-food scandal (taking big kickbacks from Saddam Hussein for not enforcing their own resolutions against Hussein and Iraq), it’s pretty obvious why the ‘sanctions’ didn’t work. Money talks. Mr. Kerry knows this, as do the rest of his campaign and the DNC. However, if he and the DNC tell the lie long enough, they know that the Kerry Kool-Aid followers will believe them. With his continuing and patently false statements that “President Bush misled us” and ‘the president lied about WMDs’, Mr. Kerry is effectively saying that President Bush should have known ahead of time that no weapons of mass destruction existed (any longer) in Iraq. Kerry underlined this when, in response to Diane Sawyer’s interview question “Was the war in Iraq worth it?” he answered “We should not have gone to war knowing the information we know today”. The problem, of course, is that President Bush DIDN’T (at the time) know the future. However, if President Bush was “psychic”, he may have been able to do so. John Kerry seems to be saying that due to the fact President Bush couldn’t see into the future, he is culpable. That, as with so many other things Kerry says, doesn’t make any sense! Later on in the interview, Ms. Sawyer went on to ask Mr. Kerry “So, you’re saying that the war with Iraq wasn’t worth it?” Kerry responded by saying he couldn’t answer that, as we would have to “wait and see how it turns out”. Huh? So, unless he knows ahead of time how things are going to turn out, he won’t do anything? That REALLY doesn’t make any sense. Apparently, Mr. Kerry isn’t psychic, either. Had he been, I’m sure he would have shared his visions (regarding WMDs) with the president; so that we wouldn’t have had to go to war. Wouldn’t he have? Or is this new ‘psychic criterion’ only applicable to President Bush? Not only is Mr. Kerry “making it up as he goes along” but, now he’s added a new element (that of being psychic) to the qualifications for the presidency; but only if the candidate’s name is George W. Bush. However John Kerry, as he has made imminently clear, isn’t psychic either. So, it looks like there is yet another area in which Mr. Kerry is not qualified to be President of the United States. It’s just one of many. ------------ About the author: About the author: Sher Zieve is a Conservative political commentator. She firmly believes that if Leftists were to run the country (and left to their own devices), it would be the end of the United States as a sovereign nation. Email: earthseed@iwon.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
