Kerry's Vote for the WAR

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-21-2004
Kerry's Vote for the WAR
76
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 3:41am

This from the book Plan of Attack, by Bob Woodward regarding Kerry's (and Kennedy's) stance on the vote to give Bush authority to go to war:


That afternoon, after two days of debate, the House passed a resolution authorizing the president to use the U.S. armed forces in Iraq "as he deems to be necessary and appropriate." The vote was a comfortable 296-133 - 46 more than the president's father had in 1991.


In the Senate, Edward M. Kennedy the Massachusetts Democrat made an impassioned plea to reject the resolution.


"The administration has not made a convincing case that we face such an imminent threat to our national security that a unilatera, preeimptive American strike and an immediate war are necessary. Nor has the adminitration laid out the cost in blood and treasure for this operaton," Kennedy said. He later added that Bush's preemptive doctrine announded to "a call for 21st Centry American imperialism that no other nation can or should accept."


Senator John F. Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat who would soon be running for president, said in a speech on the Senate floor he would vote for the resolution to use force in disarming Saddam because "a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat to our security." In announcing his support, Kerry stated that he expected the President "to fullfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days--to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution.....and to act with allies at our side if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force."


But no Democrat or other critic had been able to gain much traction in the face of the president's repeated declarations about the threat posed by Saddam and the CIA's estimates that Saddam posessed WMD and might be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power.


In light of what we know now it is understandable why Kerry voted to give the authority with the caveats he did.  Bush had no intention of working with the UNSC to adopt a resolution.  Bush was not against it so much as Cheney was. He said it would take too long and wanted to do it right away and do it without UN approval.


 

Donna
Donna

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 2:56pm
Saddam did not throw out the inspectors, Bush pulled them out. This is another neo con lie.

< France did not want to go to war with out inpections first? How many times were they going to allow Saddam to throw out the inspectors? >

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 3:28pm
Here's one from the Washington Times:

Yellowcake twists


By Jack Kelly

Joseph C. Wilson IV's shattered credibility illustrates much of what is wrong with the CIA, and with "mainstream" journalism.

Mr. Wilson's 15 minutes of fame began July 6, 2003, when he accused President of Bush of twisting the truth when he said in his State of the Union address that January: "The British government has learned that Saddam recently sought significant quantities of uranium in Africa."

Mr. Wilson, a former ambassador to Gabon, said he knew this wasn't true because in February, 2002, the CIA sent him to Niger to determine whether that African country had sold "yellowcake" (lightly enriched uranium ore) to Iraq. After spending eight days "drinking sweet mint tea and talking with dozens of people," he concluded Niger had not done so.



Mr. Wilson's fame soared when columnist Robert Novak disclosed a Bush administration official told him Mr. Wilson had been selected for the Niger mission at the recommendation of his wife, CIA officer Valerie Plame. He was a frequent guest on television news shows; the subject of a fawning profile in Vanity Fair magazine; awarded a lucrative book deal, and made an (unpaid) foreign policy adviser to Sen. John Kerry.

On July 9, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence issued its report on the CIA's prewar intelligence on Iraq. The SSCI concluded:



• Mr. Wilson lied when he denied his wife had got him the Niger assignment. "Interviews and documents provided to the committee indicate that his wife ... suggested his name for the trip."

• Mr. Wilson lied when he said his report "debunked" Mr. Bush's charge that Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium from Africa. "For most analysts, the information in report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal."



• Mr. Wilson lied when he told The Washington Post he knew the Niger intelligence had been based on forged documents. The CIA didn't obtain the document alleged to be a forgery until eight months after Mr. Wilson's return from Niger. "Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that 'the dates were wrong and the names were wrong' when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports."

On July 14, the Butler Commission issued its report on Britain's prewar intelligence. It concluded there was ample evidence Saddam tried to buy uranium from Niger and other African countries, and that Mr. Bush's statement to that effect in his State of the Union address was "well founded."

Mr. Wilson's charges against President Bush last year were big news. But the fact government investigations in two countries have concluded Mr. Wilson lied apparently isn't news at all.

NBC had Mr. Wilson on its "Meet the Press" and "Today" programs a half-dozen times when he was accusing Mr. Bush of lying. But as of this writing, no stories at all since the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Blair Commission have issued their reports. Same for ABC and CBS, according to the Media Research Center.

Mr. Wilson graced the cover of Time magazine's Oct. 13, 2003, issue, but Time managed to write a story on the Senate Intelligence Committee report without ever mentioning how it savaged Mr. Wilson's credibility.

The Senate panel criticized the CIA's sloppy work in investigating the Saddam/Africa/uranium connection. All its information came from foreign intelligence services. Aside from Mr. Wilson's tea-drinking expedition, the CIA itself made little effort to gather information on this potentially critical topic. When the Navy received a report from an African businessman that uranium from Niger was stored in a warehouse in Cotineau, Benin, the CIA didn't bother to check it out.

Some in the CIA may have been more interested in dismissing reports of an Iraq/Niger connection than in finding out if they were true. Valerie Plame told Senate investigators she told her husband "there's this crazy report" on a purported deal for Niger to sell uranium to Iraq.

If we're to win the war on terror, we need a CIA more interested in finding out what is going on than in reinforcing the prejudices of some analysts, and a news media more interested in finding the facts than in shilling for the Democratic Party.

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20040719-084057-3820r.htm




Edited 9/6/2004 3:29 pm ET ET by iminnie833

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 3:29pm

<<I know Novak outed her, but Wilson is a big talker, too. He could have told someone he shouldn't have, probably when he was relating the steamy make-out story of how he found out. >>


It was common knowledge in Washington that

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 3:29pm
That's news to me.....do you have a link where

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 3:35pm

<<"If you are critical about Bush's elective invasion of Iraq and the abuse of intelligence to further the neo-cons' political agenda you get responses like: "you can be against the WOT (war on terror) all you want" insinuating you support terrorism ">>.....


Since you are quoting from my post, I would prefer it that you ásked me if that is what I mean to say, rather than assúming that I do. What a lame debate MO!


For the record, I am not thinking, let alone insínuating ány such thing.....it's all in yóur projective mind.


Thank you.

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 3:39pm
Saddam threw out Nato inspectors a few years before 911 which is why we didn't have up-to-date intelligence and why Saddam had to be threatened with invasion to allow inspectors back in.

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 3:56pm

Here a timeline: http://www.db.idpproject.org/Sites/idpSurvey.nsf/wViewCountries/6F8E2084B7BB00ACC1256CD7004CDCD0












Difficult relations between the Iraqi regime and the UN following the Gulf War (1991-2003)











  • In Oct 98, Iraq ends all forms of cooperation with the UN Special Commission to Oversee the Destruction of Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (Unscom)
  • In Nov 02, UN weapons inspectors return to Iraq for the first time since 1998, backed by a tough UN Security Council resolution which is reluctantly accepted by Baghdad. The resolution threatens serious consequences if Iraq is in "material breach" of its terms















Ceasefire
1991 3 March - Iraq accepts the terms of a ceasefire.
1991 Mid-March/early April - Iraqi forces suppress rebellions in the south and the north of the country.
1991 8 April - A plan for the establishment of a UN safe-haven in northern Iraq, north of latitude 36 degrees north, for the protection of the Kurds, is approved at a European Union meeting in Luxembourg. On 10 April, the USA orders Iraq to end all military activity in this area.
1992 26 August - A no-fly zone, excluding flights of Iraqi planes, is established in southern Iraq, south of latitude 32 degrees north.
1993 27 June - US forces launch a cruise missile attack on Iraqi intelligence headquarters in Al-Mansur district, Baghdad in retaliation for the attempted assassination of US President, George Bush, in Kuwait in April.
1994 29 May - Saddam Hussein becomes prime minister.
1994 10 November - The Iraqi National Assembly recognizes Kuwait's borders and its independence.

Oil-for-food
1995 14 April - UNSC Resolution 986 allows the partial resumption of Iraq's oil exports to buy food and medicine ( the "oil-for-food programme"). It is not accepted by Iraq until May 1996 and is not implemented until December 1996.
1995 15 October - Saddam Hussein wins a referendum allowing him to remain president for another 7 years.
1996 31 August - In response to a call for aid from the KDP, Iraqi forces launch an offensive into the northern no-fly zone and capture of Arbil.
1996 3 September - The US extends the northern limit of the southern no-fly zone to latitude 33 degrees north, just south of Baghdad.
1996 12 December - Saddam Hussein's elder son, Uday, is seriously wounded in an assassination attempt in Baghdad's Al-Mansur district.
1998 31 October - Iraq ends all forms of cooperation with the UN Special Commission to Oversee the Destruction of Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (Unscom).

Operation Desert Fox
1998 16-19 December - After UN staff are evacuated from Baghdad, the USA and UK launch a bombing campaign, "Operation Desert Fox", to destroy Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programmes.
1999 4 January - Iraq asks the UN to replace its US and UK staff in Iraq.
1999 19 February - Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, spiritual leader of the Shi'i sect, is assassinated in Najaf.
1999 17 December - UNSC Resolution 1284 creates the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (Unmovic) to replace Unscom. Iraq rejects the resolution.
2000 1 March - Hans Blix becomes executive chairman of Unmovic.
2000 August - Reopening of Baghdad airport, followed by a stream of international flights organised by countries and organisations to campaign against sanctions. The flights are labelled humanitarian missions to comply with UN sanctions.
2000 October - Iraq resumes domestic passenger flights, the first since the 1991 Gulf War. Commercial air links re-established with Russia, Ireland and Middle East.
2001 - Free-trade zone agreements set up with neighbouring countries. Rail link with Turkey re-opened in May for first time since 1981.
2001 February - Britain, US carry out bombing raids to try to disable Iraq's air defence network. The bombings have little international support.
2001 May - Saddam's son Qusay elected to the leadership of the ruling Ba'th Party, fuelling speculation that he's being groomed to succeed his father.
2002 April - Baghdad suspends oil exports to protest against Israeli incursions into Palestinian territories. Despite calls by Saddam Hussein, no other Arab countries follow suit. Exports resume after 30 days.
2002 May - UN Security Council agrees to overhaul the sanctions regime, replacing a blanket ban on a range of goods with "smart" sanctions targeted at military and dual-use equipment.

Weapons inspectors return
2002 September - US President George Bush tells sceptical world leaders gathered at a UN General Assembly session to confront the "grave and gathering danger" of Iraq - or stand aside as the United States acts. In the same month British Prime Minister Tony Blair publishes a dossier on Iraq's military capability.
2002 November - UN weapons inspectors return to Iraq for the first time since 1998, backed by a tough UN Security Council resolution which is reluctantly accepted by Baghdad. The resolution threatens serious consequences if Iraq is in "material breach" of its terms.

UNSC 1441 of November 2002, Excerpt: "Holding Iraq in "material breach" of its obligations under previous resolutions, the Security Council this morning decided to afford it a "final opportunity to comply" with its disarmament obligations, while setting up an enhanced inspection regime for full and verified completion of the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991).

By the unanimous adoption of resolution 1441 (2002), the Council instructed the resumed inspections to begin within 45 days, and also decided it would convene immediately upon the receipt of any reports from inspection authorities that Iraq was interfering with their activities. It recalled, in that context, that the Council had repeatedly warned Iraq that it would face "serious consequences" as a result of continued violations." (UN SC 8 Nov 02)

2003 January - Chief weapons inspector Dr Hans Blix delivers a harsh report to the UN Security Council, accusing Baghdad of failing to come to a "genuine acceptance" of disarmament." (BBC News 28 Jan 2003)
2003 March – the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC reports that Iraq has accelerated its cooperation but says inspectors need more time to verify Iraqi compliance.
2003 17 March – following the failure of intensive deliberations among Security Council members on possible next steps to ensure Iraqi compliance, the UK's ambassador to the UN says the diplomatic process on Iraq has ended; UN Secretary General orders the evacuation of arms inspectors from Iraq; President Bush gives Saddam Hussein 48 hours to leave Iraq or face war.
2003 19 March – UN Secretary General addresses UNSC, expressing regret and disappointment at the imminence of war.

Djie

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 4:04pm
OK, I was wrong, it wasn't Bush who pulled them out, it was the UN, because they could see Bush was determined to go to war.

Regardless, they were pulled out, Saddam did not kick them out.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2003
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 4:07pm
IMO, many others could make the same inference from your statement, and other similar statements elsewhere on this board. Yours happened to be the last one I read so it was the first one to mind.

I was merely pointing out the prejoritive nature of such sweeping statements.

You claim to be a centrist and non-partisan.

Again IMO, you can offer proof of this by being more specific when handling such a loaded statement as the 'war on terror(ism)' in the future.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-21-2004
Mon, 09-06-2004 - 4:07pm
I cannot believe you actually believe people tell whoppers to sell books. You believe what you want to, no matter what. You want to believe that this president and his men acted in the best interest of the country and that anyone who says differently is a liar and cannot possible be telling the truth. I did read your post. I just don't believe it is the whole truth.
Donna
Donna

Pages