Beautiful Speech

[Jagsbch]

Republicons.org Exclusive

In 1992 during the heated campaign for the Whitehouse the mantra for the Clinton/Gore team was “it’s the economy, stupid”, but the assault on Bush the elder could just have easily been targeted toward his administration’s duplicity on Iraq. In September 1992 Senator and Vice Presidential candidate Al Gore addressed the Center for International Policy and articulated a comprehensive dissertation on the inconsistencies, fabrications and collaboration between the Reagan/Bush I administrations and Saddam Hussein.

Republicons.org has acquired a transcript of the speech delivered by Gore and it exhaustively details, in classic Gore fashion, a twelve year history of politically expedience, appeasement and clandestine cooperation with Iraq. Regardless of what one feels about Al Gore politically and personally, his one unimpeachable quality is his being the preeminent policy wonk; he is at the zenith of contemporary political scholarship.

Below are extended relevant excerpts from his speech and the entire speech, in PDF format, may be downloaded from the link at the end of this article. In today’s Bush II administration, in which Saddam is vilified as Hitler reincarnate, it is telling to remember that the cast of characters is largely unchanged from the period reviewed by Gore and the contradictions in word and deed are even more poignant.

A few important notes; when Gore refers to President Bush he is, of course referring to George H.W. Bush not George W Bush (although in many places they could be interchanged). Second, the downloadable speech is in Adobe PDF format, should you require the free Acrobat PDF reader please visit http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html.

Excerpts from Gore’s speech of September 29, 1992:

President Bush, in his handling of our policy toward Iraq [has shown] poor judgment, moral blindness and bungling policies led directly to a war that should never have taken place. U.S. taxpayers are now stuck with paying the bill for $1.9 billion President Bush gave to Saddam Hussein even though top administration officials were repeatedly told Saddam was using our dollars to buy weapons technology. Bush, of course, believes that the war with Iraq was his finest hour as the organizer and leader of a vast coalition of armed forces, united for the purpose of frustrating the designs of an evil dictator.

But the war with Iraq had deep roots, and if George Bush's prosecution of the war is part of his record, so too is his involvement in the diplomacy which led to it, both in the Reagan/Bush era, and far more so, during his presidency when he accelerated foreign aid and the sale of weapons technology to Iraq -- right up until the invasion of Kuwait -- in spite of repeated warnings that anyone with common sense would have had no difficulty understanding.

Nineteen months ago [January 1991 – the onset of the Iraq war], President Bush called Saddam Hussein a new Hitler who had to be stopped at all costs. Yet today, that same tyrant remains firmly in power, resisting by every means the will of the international community. No wonder so many Americans ask themselves whether our victory over Saddam will ultimately prove an illusion.

George Bush wants the American people to see him as the hero who put out a raging fire. But new evidence now shows that he is the one who set the fire. He not only struck the match, he poured gasoline on the flames. So give him credit for calling in the fire department, but understand who started the blaze.

In September of 1980, Iraq invaded Iran. Iraq was the odds-on favorite to win the war in short order. However, by May 1982, Iraq was clearly in trouble. It had lost a major battle with Iran. Our policy-makers began to imagine Iran under a radical Islamic government emerging as the dominant regional power: a nightmare. I believe that is why, in February 1982, President Reagan took Iraq off the list of states that sponsored terrorism.

By taking Iraq's name off the list, President Reagan opened the way for Iraq to receive US credits through subsidized agricultural loan guarantees and Export-Import Bank credits.

In other words, for strategic reasons, the Reagan/Bush Administration would overlook virtually any unpleasant reality in Iraq, and apparently subvert US laws in order to prop up Saddam Hussein's brutal regime.

George Bush cannot even try to claim ignorance where policy toward Iraq was concerned. Not only was he directly in the loop, he was a principal architect of the policy from its earliest days. For example, in April of 1984, Bush personally lobbied the Ex-Im Bank's chairman--a friend from college days--to disregard the views of his own economists, and extend credits to Iraq. Doubts about Iraq's credit-worthiness were very well-founded. But the overriding issue was whether Iraq could continue to hold on in the war with Iran. That's all that seemed to matter.

In pursuit of that objective, the Reagan/Bush Administration would overlook the fact that it was an Iraq-based group that masterminded the assassination attempt against Israel's ambassador to the UK, which occurred in June 1982. The Reagan/Bush Administration was also prepared to overlook the fact that the terrorist who masterminded the attack on the Achille Lauro and the savage murder of American Leon Klinghoffer fled with Iraqi assistance. Nor did it matter that the team of terrorists who set out to blow up the Rome airport came from Baghdad with suitcase bombs.

Iraq not only stayed off the terrorist list no matter what, but in November 1984, full diplomatic relations were established with the country. The US government continued to exert every effort to channel assistance to Saddam Hussein--even with evidence that he was not only promoting terrorism, but was also pursuing a nuclear weapons program. As early as May of 1985, Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle warned about the suspected diversion of US exports of dual-use technology to the Iraqi nuclear weapons program. But Bush ensured that the flow of technology continued.

In March 1987, Bush again took a prominent role: when Iraq's ambassador complained that our Defense Department was taking too long and being too cautious about export licenses for high tech items, Bush apparently agreed with him that the Defense Department was being capricious and had to get with the program.

There might have been a moment's pause for reflection when Iraqi aircraft intentionally attacked the USS Stark in May 1987, killing 37 sailors -- but the Administration smoothed it over very fast. This was the spring when the Ex-Im Bank staff resisted another $200 million loan for Iraq, but again the loan was granted after Bush again personally intervened to stress its political importance. The loan went through in May, just two days before the attack on the Stark.

Within days of the end of the Iran-Iraq War, Saddam Hussein--seeing that he had gotten away with using poison gas against the Kurds previously--launched additional major gas attacks on them. The war was over, and he was determined to settle accounts. Saddam's attacks created, in addition to the wave of deaths, a flight of about a half million Kurdish refugees.

The outrage and disgust sparked action and ignited an intensification of efforts to pull the plug on US assistance to Saddam Hussein. I myself went to the Senate floor twice demanding tough action. But these efforts were resisted to the bitter end by the Reagan/Bush and Bush/Quayle Administrations. For example, they pulled out all the stops to defeat the Prevention of Genocide Act, after the US Senate had passed it unanimously in September of 1988.

Most significant of all, in [April 1989], the CIA reported to Secretary of State James Baker and other top Bush administration officials that Iraq was clandestinely procuring nuclear weapons technology through a global network of front companies.

Now, in the midst of this flood of highly alarming information, on October 2, 1989, President Bush signed a document known as NSD-26, which established policy toward Iraq under his Administration.

NSD-26 mandated the pursuit of improved economic and political ties with Iraq on the assumption that Iraqi behavior could be modified by means of new favors to be granted. Perhaps so, if this were a state not under the complete control of a single man whose ruthlessness was already totally apparent. The text of NSD-26 blindly ignores the evidence already at the Administration's disposal of Iraqi behavior in the past regarding human rights, terrorism, the use of chemical weapons, and the pursuit of advanced weapons of mass destruction.

It leaps from the page, that George Bush, both as Vice President and President, had done his utmost to make sure that no such sanctions would ever apply to Saddam Hussein. Consequently, the question is unavoidable: why should Saddam Hussein be concerned about a threat of action in the future from the same man who had resolutely blocked any such action in the past? To the contrary Saddam had every reason to assume that Bush would look the other way -- no matter what he did.

In October of 1989, representatives of the Departments of State and Agriculture met to discuss Iraq's diversion of US agricultural credits into the acquisition of US technology for its nuclear weapons program. Later that same month, however, on October 26th, Assistant Secretary of State Kelly sent Secretary Baker a memo jointly written with the State Department's legal counsel, Abe Sofaer, urging that Baker push an additional $1 billion in agricultural loan guarantees for Iraq.

In January of 1990, President Bush issued a determination that exempted Iraq from section 512 of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of November 1989 prohibiting further loans to Iraq [o]n grounds of "national security".

In February 1990, Saddam Hussein called for the removal of US military forces from the Persian Gulf. And yet, the same month, the Administration actually apologized to Saddam for the content of a Voice of America broadcast criticizing Iraq's human rights record.

On April 12th, at the personal request of Bush, Senators Bob Dole and Alan Simpson -- the number one and number two Republican leaders in the Senate -- travelled to Baghdad and told Saddam Hussein that President Bush was still ready to veto any sanctions bill that Congress might pass.

n July, as Iraqi tanks and soldiers massed on the Kuwaiti border, the Senate tried to pass another sanctions bill against Iraq...and the Administration opposed it. Not only that, but on the eve of the invasion, the Bush/Quayle Administration kept selling Saddam dual- use technology such as sophisticated computers, flight simulators, and equipment to manufacture gun barrels.

President Bush has explicitly denied that his policies enhanced Saddam Hussein's nuclear, biological and chemical capabilities. He denied this, not only in an official report to Congress in the fall of 1991, but as recently as June 13th and July 1st of this year, when Bush said: "We did not enhance Saddam Hussein's nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons capability." But as I have just mentioned, his own Secretary of State knew differently at least as of July 1990.

And incredibly, immediately following the war, President Bush reverted to form. At President Bush's encouragement, an armed resistance to Saddam Hussein sprang up in Iraq. But at the critical moment, it was George Bush's decision to betray that resistance by tolerating Saddam Hussein's use of attack helicopters to put down the rebellions. That was a clear violation of the terms of the ceasefire, and it was a violation we had more than enough power to suppress. :doh:

============================

You got to love the set up. I can't believe we gave this guy that much rope to hang himself with... Guess in order to see how bad we really are, we have to do everything we can to beef up our enemy to make it a fight worth fighting:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

article from RepubliCONS.com

[Jagsbch]

Speaking of speech's...

Base Commander Predicts 'Horrifying' War

By TARA COPP - Scripps Howard News Service

332ND AIR EXPEDITIONARY WING, Persian Gulf -- Saying war with Iraq has become unstoppable and imminent, the commander of a sprawling base in the Persian Gulf gave a somber prewar speech to his assembled troops Friday, predicting a "horrifying experience" likely to include chemical or biological attack.

"In my opinion, this is the last time I'll do this before this thing kicks off," Col. Tom Jones said of his speech, a monthly base-wide "Commander's Call."

"Three weeks ago, I would have told you there was a 50-50 chance the international community could convince Saddam (to disarm). Now, I don't think anything could happen to stop it," Jones said. "My guess is, it's soon. I think it's going to happen, I think it's going to be a horrifying experience and a lot of people are going to get hurt. I am not eager to go to war, but I am eager to get this over with and get to go home."

One of the biggest fears for the base is a biological or chemical attack, Jones somberly reminded the troops.

"I think he's got them, I think he's going to use them. Is he going to use them on us here? I don't know. But we are one of a lot of lucrative targets for him."

Warning of a possible missile strike, Jones appeared to bolster news reports that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was moving his troops and missiles within range of Israel and closer to Kuwait and that pre-emptive strikes by Iraq were anticipated.

"It's a very short flight from Iraq to here," Jones said. "If it happens, we'll sound the alarm and dive into the bunkers. And when we come out, we'll smite this guy with a fury he has never seen before."

For security, the Air Force won't allow disclosure of the base name or location, but, as Jones told the troops Friday evening, it is one of the largest airpower bases in the region, with several thousand Air Force, Navy, Marines and Army personnel.

It is now at full capacity with a large contingent of F-15s, F-18s, British Harriers, F-16s, A-10 Warthogs, C-130s and Patriot missile batteries. The fighters are running 24-hour Operation Southern Watch missions over Iraq, and are now shot at by Iraqi forces during almost every mission, Jones said.

"I'm sure most of you are nervous," he said. "It's like a big test that you've been studying for, but you don't know what questions they'll ask. You think you're ready for it but you just don't know.

"You're ready. You will do fine, because you are aware of the consequences of failure. 9/11 is a consequence of failure. If we fail, we lose the freedoms our country has learned to live by and love.

"You are superbly trained for what you are about to face. You are ready for this. Fight like you're trained, follow procedures and you'll get through this fine."

Scripps Howard correspondent Tara Copp can be reached at coppt(at)shns.com

Article