← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · londo
Thread ID: 14981 | Posts: 1 | Started: 2004-09-13
2004-09-13 04:06 | User Profile
Time to Get Out of Iraq is Now!, Says Constitution Party Presidential Candidate Michael Anthony Peroutka By News Article Sep 10, 2004, 21:32
WASHINGTON,-- The following statement has been issued by Constitution Party Presidential candidate Michael Anthony Peroutka whose running mate is Dr. Chuck Baldwin. The Constitution Party may be on as many as 40 -- or possibly more -- state ballots by election day
As the U.S. military death toll reached 1,000 in George Bush's unnecessary, un-Constitutional and enormously expensive ($200 billion plus) war in Iraq, long gone is any talk about Saddam Hussein having any Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). The only things that have been massively destroyed are the original rationales for this bloody mess. The old arguments for getting us into this quagmire lie in rubble.
In his 2003 State of the Union address, Mr. Bush said: "Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks to build and keep weapons of mass destruction. But why? The only possible explanation, the only possible use he could have for those weapons, is to dominate, intimidate or attack. With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region."
But, in his 2004 State of the Union address, Mr. Bush said nothing about Iraq having WMDs or, possibly, nuclear weapons or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons. Instead, he spoke of a report which identified dozens of weapons of "mass destruction-related" program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations.
This is a far cry from Bush Administration officials who warned that Saddam Hussein's "smoking gun" just might be "a mushroom cloud."
Also just a fading memory is Mr. Bush's explicit opposition to so-called "nation-building." In a Presidential debate on October 11, 2000, candidate Bush said that what "went wrong" in Somalia was when the mission of our troops there "changed into a nation-building mission." He said: "And so I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building."
The next day, on NBC's "Today" program, Mr. Bush was shown saying that he was not for using our troops all around the world "to serve as social workers, or as policemen, or, you know, school-walk crossing guards. I'm not for that. And I don't think America is for that either."
Pat Buchanan is right. On NBC's "Meet The Press" (9/5/04), he said we should execute a "strategic withdrawal" from Iraq because this war is "a terrible mistake." Pat also noted, correctly, that while Saddam Hussein was a criminal, a thug and a brute, "he was no threat to a country (the U.S.) that flew 40,000 sorties over Iraq in 10 years. He did not shoot down a single one."
Disagreeing with Pat was former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich whose arguments for the war in Iraq, ironically, demonstrated the truth of what Pat had just said. Gingrich noted that Hussein "was paying $25,000 to the family of every Hamas and Hezbollah bomber." But, were these bombers bombing Americans in America? No.
[url=http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_11677.shtml] Read the rest here. [/url]