Bush's Distortions Misled Congress in Its War Vote:Senator Kennedy

COMMENTARY
Bush's Distortions Misled Congress in Its War Vote
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-kennedy19mar19,1,1633095,print.story
By Edward M. Kennedy

March 19, 2004



We can only speculate about the real reasons we went to war. What is known, however, is that, at the time the decision was being made in the summer of 2002, Osama bin Laden was still at large, the war against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan had entered a troubled phase, our economy was reeling from recession, the president's approval rating in the Gallup Poll had declined from its peak of 90% after Sept. 11 to 63% by Labor Day 2002, and control of the Senate and House was at stake in the critical congressional elections in November that year.

Karl Rove, the president's political advisor, made it clear early on that the war on terrorism could be used politically. At a Republican National Committee meeting on Jan. 19, 2002, he said, "We can go to the country on this issue, because they trust the Republican Party to do a better job of protecting and strengthening America's military might and thereby protecting America."

The president, as principal cheerleader for war, said on Sept. 25, 2002, "You can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." On Oct. 2, he said the issue "is a threat of unique urgency." On Oct. 7, he said, "facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." On Oct. 10, the House approved the war resolution 296 to 133; the Senate approved it 77 to 23 the next day.



Presumably, the administration felt it could not persuade Congress to authorize the war on the basis of chemical and biological weapons alone, since Hussein's arsenal had been successfully contained for years. The case for war depended on hyping the nuclear threat and ties to Al Qaeda. In fact, the intelligence community had poured cold water on both the nuclear threat and the Al Qaeda link before the war began. CIA Director George J. Tenet stated in a speech last month that the agency told the administration before the war that "Saddam did not have a nuclear weapon, and probably would have been unable to make one until 2007 to 2009."


The truth was there to see, but the administration refused to see it. America went to war in a dishonest way that alienated key allies, divided and weakened the United Nations, outraged the world community, made us more hated in the world and made the war on terrorism more difficult to win.

of an illegitimate leadership to begin with. Were they all more worried about their political careers? It's a result of entrenched strategical thinking rather than doing the right thing for one's constituency and the country at large.

Bushco should have been vigorously fought from the get-go (beginning with the Florida debacle or even sooner). We are living with the consequences.

It didn't take a rocket scientist to understand the dynamics and hidden agendas.....Yes, "the truth WAS there to see", so why was it ignored by ALL parties involved?

surely contrary to what this country should stand for, far more than they love their country, the Bill of Rights, liberty and freedom, equal protection under the law, our Constitution.

responsible for 911, and the countdown for war was beating loudly.

There is an estimated $5,000,000,000,000 worth of OIL RESERVES in Iraq. Are those enough reasons?

Oh sure, Bu$hCo is setting up a puppet government (just as he has done in Afghanistan and Haiti). And the UN is welcome to go in clean the johns in Bremer's palace.

But no matter what, Bush-Cheney control the OIL!

against the war. A lot of us knew the jerks were lying. Why were the Democrats so dumb? Why couldn't they listen to the people that vote for them. 90% of the world knew Bush was lying. Gephart and Daschle jumped at the chance to follow the great idiot.

while being maligned by the Bushivicks as senile. He stood almost alone. He deserves a statue.