← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Faust
Thread ID: 5659 | Posts: 10 | Started: 2003-03-20
2003-03-20 06:20 | User Profile
Sen. Robert Byrd: 'Today I Weep for My Country'
Wednesday, March 19, 2003; 9:57 PM
By Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The oldest voice in the U.S. Congress rose on Wednesday to offer a final pre-war warning that President Bush's march to battle is dangerously misguided.
"Today I weep for my country," said West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd. "No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. ... Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.
"We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance," Byrd said, adding: "After war has ended the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe."
Byrd, a leading foe on Capitol Hill of war with Iraq, spoke in a nearly empty Senate chamber about four hours before Bush's 8 p.m. EST deadline for Saddam Hussein to leave Iraq or face a U.S.-led invasion.
"May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us," Byrd said.
As the white-haired senator concluded his remarks, a number of people in the visitor's gallery rose and applauded before they were admonished to be quiet.
At 85, Byrd is now the oldest member of Congress as well as the longest serving. He was first elected to the Senate in 1958, after six years in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Byrd was among those who voted last year against the congressional resolution that authorized Bush to use force in his showdown with Saddam, and the senator has given frequent floor speeches since then warning against war.
Polls on Wednesday showed strong American support for a war but widespread opposition to it overseas.
"The case this administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence," Byrd said.
Despite administration suggestions to the contrary, Byrd said, "There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11."
The senator said, "We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice."
Byrd said that instead of negotiating, Washington demanded obedience or threatened recrimination. "Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves."
He said many questions about the looming war were unanswered -- including how long it would last, what it would cost, what its ultimate mission was.
"A pall has fallen over the Senate chamber," Byrd said. "We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq."
url: [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56635-2003Mar19.html]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Mar19.html[/url]
2003-03-20 11:29 | User Profile
Byrd said that instead of negotiating, Washington demanded obedience or threatened recrimination. "Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves."
Precisely.
This has to be the end of the UN, doesn't it? I mean, who could possibly take it seriously when its most powerful member refuses to abide by its treaty obligations under the UN Charter?
Also, what happens now to NATO? What's the point of it when we go to war without France and Germany? And in the teeth of a French Security Council veto?
What will Russia do? They've got lots of oil, and find themselves aligned with Germany and France.
What will China do? They need lots of Russian oil and gas, and would really like to get their fingers around Taiwan's neck.
How will the Muslim street react? Will they just fizzle like they did the last several times, or will there actually be Islamic revolution in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc.?
The next few weeks are shaping up to be some of the most interesting in memory.
Opportunities for our side are sure to present themselves. Stay tuned.
Walter
2003-03-20 11:32 | User Profile
I should add that I'm mildly surprised that Bush actually attacked.
I was clinging to the hope that he was bluffing, and that he'd ultimately bow to international opinion and maybe work out some sort of face-saving measure.
But that was not to be.
The United States has just broken its most solemn treaty promises to its oldest and best allies.
It's a sad day, indeed.
Walter
2003-03-20 13:57 | User Profile
Originally posted by Walter Yannis@Mar 20 2003, 06:32 ** I should add that I'm mildly surprised that Bush actually attacked.
I was clinging to the hope that he was bluffing, and that he'd ultimately bow to international opinion and maybe work out some sort of face-saving measure.
But that was not to be.
The United States has just broken its most solemn treaty promises to its oldest and best allies.
It's a sad day, indeed.
Walter **
I know what you mean there Walter as I was mildly surprised too. Senator Byrd dissenting publicly is a very good thing. I loved it! Even Daschle gets a thumbs up from me (interesting times, huh?) for stating Bush "failed miserably" at diplomacy. Now I'm not jumping on these Democrats' bandwagon, but the more public dissent we get from our politicians, the better for us. The Americans who are against this war, from Left to Right, from extremes (us?) to moderates should be finding common grounds and ideals to believe that the US Republic can rise again in greatness, if the power is given, or better yet, taken back to/for We the People.
2003-03-20 14:31 | User Profile
Originally posted by xmetalhead@Mar 20 2003, 13:57 ** The Americans who are against this war, from Left to Right, to extremes to moderates are finding common grounds and ideals to believe that the Republic can rise again in greatness, if the power is given back to We the People. **
I hope with you that opposition to this imperialist war of agression will gather strength. I've seen little sign of that yet, unfortunately.
Walter
2003-03-20 17:22 | User Profile
** Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. **
Has America become a Jew, so to speak?
2003-03-20 19:28 | User Profile
Germanophilia among some Russians wouldn't be anything new. It even manifested itself on two recent movies, "Brat" and "Brat 2", where the main character likes the Germans (in "Brat 2" there is even an underground arms dealer selling salvaged WWII weapons introducing himself as "Fascist" and using "Heil Hitler" as salutation), but doesn't like Jews and racial and cultural problems of America are highlighted in "Brat 2", where the main character makes a visit to the US, and he's shown definely wanting to return as quick as possible. The director of the movies, Alexei Balabanov, is what would be called "white nationalist" in the US and is open in his interviews about races and Jew problem. "Brat 2" is mildly anti-American, with America being represented by the dumb FReaker type of population, pussified whites and aggressive blacks.
I highly recommend renting/borrowing/buying the following movies by Balabanov:
"Brat 2" "War"
[url=http://www.artmargins.com/content/cineview/lavrentiev.html]http://www.artmargins.com/content/cineview...lavrentiev.html[/url]
2003-03-20 20:26 | User Profile
wintermute (Posted on Mar 20 2003, 19:53 )
** Germano-Russian alliance was the centerpiece of Yockey's geopolitical vision. He saw it as the only possible counterbalance to a despotic, aggressive United States.**
A lot of interesting stuff has emerged from those Russian archives recently, much of it exonerating Germany. Does Putin harbor a private copy of Imperium for late nite persual in the Kremlin?
Long before Yockey a real madman had visions of German-Russian cooperation.
** Even more emphatic about the importance of Russia to Germany was philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche much preferred the feelings and intuitions of the Russian Nihilists to the English Utilitarians. [color=blue]The intergrowth of Slav and German races guided by the world's cleverest financiers, the Jews, was necessary for Germany to become master of the world.[/color] He wanted to jettison the right of people to representation. He demanded the representation of great interests. Germany required unconditional union with Russia with a mutual plan to exclude English schemes to gain mastery of Russia. Nietzsche, who thought Bismarck a Slav, was appalled by what he saw in the new world: "No American future!". Writing some 25 years before World War I started, Nietzsche had a vision which would have forestalled the catastrophic European Civil Wars of the twentieth century. His empire would not have met the demanding criteria of Woodrow Wilson, who engaged in pressing American national lunacies on older wiser nations in Europe after World War I. Though the resulting Teuton-Slav Empire would not have been democratic, the great slaughters of Europe would have been averted, and his empire surely would have been the strongest in the world. After World War II Stalin remarked to his daughter "Well, together with the Germans we would have been invincible". This sentiment must still exist in both countries.**
I sometimes wonder if this may be necessary for Europe to survive. It is obvious to me America cannot furnish the leadership. I most emphatically am concerned over the role ordained for Jews. The crooked Jews now running Russian economically would screw or kill anybody.
2003-03-21 06:26 | User Profile
Originally posted by wintermute@Mar 20 2003, 18:53 ** > What will Russia do? They've got lots of oil, and find themselves aligned with Germany and France.
A Germano-Russian alliance was the centerpiece of Yockey's geopolitical vision. He saw it as the only possible counterbalance to a despotic, aggressive United States.
A lot of interesting stuff has emerged from those Russian archives recently, much of it exonerating Germany. Does Putin harbor a private copy of Imperium for late nite persual in the Kremlin?
Wintermute **
Putin is a screaming Germanophile. He speaks German very well, and one of his more interesting symbolic acts was to appoint a Russian of German decent to head GAZPROM, Russia's industrial crown jewel.
American lawlessness makes a German-French-Russian alliance more likely, it seems to me. They're natural trading partners, they're neighbors, they have a common culture and history, and they face the same threats to their sovereignty from America in the west, China in the East, and Islam in the south.
Shrub's reckless decision to go to war will have far-reaching consequences. I watched Putin's statement on satellite last night. He's deeply PO'd about this, as are France and Germany. It's impossible to say how this will shake out, but it has to be a turning point of some kind - of Europe and America away from each other.
Walter
2003-03-21 12:43 | User Profile
Originally posted by Walter Yannis@Mar 21 2003, 06:26 ** Shrub's reckless decision to go to war will have far-reaching consequences. **
Baby Bush has delivered America into the hands of itz enemy. Next election in say... 20 months, we'll see Jew Lieberman and Cuntus Extrordinairus... er... I mean, Hillary Clitless ruling America.
Oh well... let the games begin.