You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Mudville Gazette: The Empty Throne
2004-11-01
Yes, it's been linked to from elsewhere, but I think this needs all the distribution it can get... and, if there are no objections, Fred, I'd like to put this on page 1; if there was ever a time an opinion piece needed to be on the main page, it would be now.

The following is Kerry's latest position on Iraq, as he explained it to Tom Brokaw this past week. Something I saw reminded me of this today:

Brokaw: This week you've been very critical of the president because of the missing explosives in Iraq.The fact is, senator, we still don't know what happened to those explosives. How many for sure that were there. Who might have gotten away with them? Is it unfair to the president, just as you believe he's been unfair to you, to blame him for that?

Kerry: No. It's not unfair. Because what we do know, from the commanders on the ground, is that they went there, as they marched to Baghdad. We even read stories today that they broke locks off of the doors, took photographs of materials in there. There were materials. And they left.

Brokaw: The flip side of that is that if you had been president, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. Because you...

Kerry: Not necessarily at all.

Brokaw: But you have said you wouldn't go to war against him...

Kerry: That's not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons.

Brokaw: But he wasn't destroying them...

Kerry: But that's what you have inspectors for. And that's why I voted for the threat of force. Because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It's absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn't necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn't complied, we might have had to go to war. And we might have gone to war. But if we did, I'll tell you this, Tom. We'd have gone to war with allies in a way that the American people weren't carrying the burden. And the entire world would have understood why we were doing it.

As I said, I was reminded of that incoherent ramble today, when I saw this:



A very necessarily empty throne in Baghdad. It's not that hard to understand, is it?


I'd like everyone who ever said Saddam Hussein was a secularist, and not connected with terrorism, and of no real concern to us, to take a long hard look at the chair and the painting, and if necessary, themselves. Please. The time is long past when we can argue whether a rabid dog is one that we can afford to hope will only bite someone else.



Make sure your neighbors do too.
Posted by:Phil Fraering

00:00