Just wanted to say a couple of things regarding your post. About the "deadline" Bush supposedly had regarding the weather, Summer coming on, troops can't wait forever, and the rest of the "pressure to invade" syndrome that we kept reading about in the news, hearing about, in one form or another, from the Administration, as a "need" to attack Iraq, because it just couldn't wait! ...it reminds me of the mindset the European Powers had just before WWI broke out. The belief was that if a potential opponent mobilized it's military, and moved it to their frontiers, that you had to mobilize, because to wait gave your potential adversary an advantage you couldn't allow. And if you both mobilized, that the first country ready to attack, must attack, because if you waited, then you lost the advantage, which might lead to defeat. So, when the Major Powers mobilized, war was inevitable. That is what they believed. And, because of their belief, war became a reality. We all know how that turned out. Bush did not have to attack Iraq because he had our troops sitting there, ready to go. What we saw was the WWI Mobilization Syndrome hard at work, in the 21st century. It was a mindset that the Administration, along with the Brass, who were willing to keep whatever reservations they may have had to themselves, gave to the American public and the world. The truth is, as expensive as waiting may have been, and as uncomfortable it might have been for our troops, and as much as an impediment it presented to the aims of the Bush Administration, waiting would have been the best course. Pressure, already building on Saddam, would have only increased to a fever pitch as we sat leashed and straining at his borders. The world would have seen our restraint. The pressure on those who might have joined us, given sufficient time for diplomacy, time to prepare their populations for the possibility of war, and time for adequate proof that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction, and had direct, active and supporting ties to AQ, would have been a far, far better course for us to take. Look at what this invasion and occupation of Iraq has cost us. How can anyone seriously imagine that waiting, even if it were for months, wouldn't have been preferable to what we have now? How will we ever know how the situation Iraq presented to us would have played out, had we waited? Well, we know how things have turned out now. The future is far more uncertain today than it was before "the balloon went up," and war was unleashed upon Iraq. Sometimes, patience is a virtue. It is a virtue the Bush Administration didn't possess then, and doesn't possess now. Afghanistan would be different today if we had chosen not to invade Iraq when we did. We took resources from that theatre to prepare for Iraq, and after the invasion was launched. Who knows what might have happened if we had not been distracted by the war that could have waited? And you are absolutely right about the Gavin. We have Strykers and Humvees that are unsuited for much of the war environment Iraq presents. The Gavins would be invaluable. Yet another example of poor planning, and another reason that waiting could, and would, have been to our advantage. Had someone with sufficient clout in the chain of command seen the need for the Gavin to be deployed, if we were to occupy Iraq, then waiting would have given us the time to get a good number of them upgraded and ready for action. BTW, didn't we discuss this in a thread a few weeks ago? A few of us did, anyway. Hey, thanks for the post. A bit of a different spin, and it gave me an excuse to trot out my WWI comparison, along with some of my reasons against this mad rush to war the Bush Administration thrust upon this country, and the rest of the world. Oh, and I love Will's take on the debate. I saw it as much more of a draw, with the BS and negatives of the two balancing each other out, at least as far as I thought the public would perceive it. As usual, Will sees things his own way, and we are enlightened. Keep D&D Civil!!
It's pretty sad that you would consider "if you vote for George Bush you've lost your mind" a discussion of the issues. You must really think the issues are simple. It is NOT even an acknowledgement that there are issues, let alone a discussion of them. It was merely a bile-filled piece of sheer bravado. It is this type of disscussion of the issues that has led to the utterance of these phrases: "Bike racks...after school." "Up your nose with a rubber hose" AND "(explative deleted)"
YO Deckard. That was an excellent post and couldn't have said it better. I posting something similar in the Duelfer Report thread but what I should've done is cut and paste yours.
What? I said it was a clumsy way to refer to the issues. I never suggested that it was a proper way to discuss the issues. The statement was made in the context of issues. The quote was cut from its original context which did acknowledge and mention the issues. It wasn't a question where the reporter asked why shouldn't someone vote for Bush and the answer was anone who does has lost their mind. It was part of a larger discussion.
It also was a stretch for Cheney to suggest that he frequently presides over the Senate. Cheney wields the gavel only when he's needed to cast tie-breaking votes, which happened only three times in 2003. He does visit Capitol Hill on Tuesdays, for strategy lunches with Republican senators, but no Democrats are invited. http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/9845192.htm
More Debunking of the Dark Lord from DU... In the debate, Cheney said Edwards has "one of the worst attendance records in the United States Senate." In truth, Edwards has an 84.8% voting record in the Senate. In each of his first four years, he had a perfect or near perfect record: 1999 Cast 371 out of 274 votes for a 99.2% voting record 2000 Cast 298 out of 298 votes for a 100% voting record 2001 Cast 377 out of 380 votes for a 99.2% voting record 2002 Cast 253 out of 253 votes for a 100% voting record 2003 Cast 281 out of 459 votes for a 61.2% voting record 2004 Cast 84 out of 198 votes for a 42.4% voting record OVERALL Edwards has cast 1664 out of 1962 votes for a 84.8% voting record. Also in the debate, Dick Cheney said the following: Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight. Cheney's lie about never meeting Edwards has been exposed repeatedly and by many sources. However, the first part is actually a much bigger lie. As Senate attendance records show, in the 126 Tuesdays the Senate has been in session during Cheney's tenure as Vice-President, he has actually only presided over the Senate as President on two occasions. During the same stretch, to fill in for Cheney's repeated absence, Edwards has served as acting President of the Senate on two occasions. The complete list in in the extended copy. The source for this information is Congressional Record. 2001 1/30 Enzi 2/6 Chafee 2/13 Chafee 2/27 Allen 3/6 Burns 3/13 Reid 3/20 DeWine 3/27 Chafee 4/3 Smith 4/24 Chafee 5/1 Chafee 5/8 Chafee 5/15 Frist 5/22 Chafee 5/29 Enzi 6/5 Byrd 6/19 Carper 6/26 Bayh 7/10 Nelson 7/17 Clinton 7/24 Byrd 7/31 Stabenaw 9/25 Wellstone 10/2 Clinton 10/9 Clinton 10/16 Edwards 10/23 Byrd 10/30 Bingaman 11/13 Murray 11/27 Jeffords 12/4 Stabenaw 12/11 Carnahan 12/18 Nelson 2002 1/29 Nelson 2/5 Kohl 2/12 Stabenow 2/26 Landrieu 3/5 Edwards 3/12 Landrieu 3/19 Miller 4/9 Cleland 4/16 Reed 4/23 Wellstone 4/30 Nelson 5/7 Miller 5/14 Cleland 5/21 Nelson 6/4 Durbin 6/11 Corzine 6/18 Dayton 6/25 Landrieu 7/9 Reed 7/16 Corzine 7/23 Reed 7/30 Clinton 9/3 Reed 9/10 Corzine 9/17 Reid 9/24 Stabenow 10/1 Miller 10/8 Miller 10/15 Reid 11/12 Cheney 11/19 Barkley (MN) 2003 1/7 Cheney 1/14 Stevens 1/22 Stevens 1/28 Stevens 2/4 Stevens 2/11 Stevens 2/25 Stevens 3/4 Stevens 3/11 Stevens 3/18 Stevens 3/25 Stevens 4/1 Stevens 4/8 Stevens 4/29 Stevens 5/6 Talent 5/13 Ensign 5/20 Alexander 6/3 Stevens 6/10 Stevens 6/18 Murkowski 6/24 Coleman 7/8 Stevens 7/15 Stevens 7/22 Chaffee 7/29 Stevens 9/2 Stevens 9/9 Stevens 9/16 Stevens 9/23 Stevens 9/30 Sununu 10/21 Stevens 10/28 Stevens 11/4 Stevens 11/11 Warner 11/18 Stevens 12/9 Stevens 2004 1/20 Stevens 1/27 Enzi 2/3 Stevens 2/10 Stevens 3/2 Stevens 3/9 Hagel 3/16 Sununu 3/23 Stevens 3/30 Ensign 4/6 Cornyn 4/20 Stevens 4/27 Chambliss 5/4 Stevens 5/11 Stevens 5/18 Stevens 6/1 Stevens 6/8 Hutchinson 6/15 Stevens 6/22 Allard 7/6 Burns 7/13 Stevens 7/20 Enzi 9/7 Stevens 9/14 Chafee 9/21 Enzi 9/28 Stevens 10/05 Stevens
