Dean: War "Strategic Error"- indicts those who didn't stand up

[Rose Siding]

Dean Calls War "Strategic Error"; Cites Army War College Report, Secretary O'Neill Statements, Carnegie Endowment
Time To Stand Up for America, Stand Against Administration that Misled Nation Into War

BURLINGTON--In response to a new report from the Army War College calling the war in Iraq "a strategic error," Governor Howard Dean, M.D., offered the following comments:

"Next week marks one year since the State of the Union address in which President Bush rallied the country to war, in large part by misleading Americans and falsely claiming that Iraq posed an imminent threat to our security.

"Leading Democrats -- including many of my opponents in this race -- stood by and in some cases stood with the President as he led us into a war that now even experts at the Army War College call a 'strategic error.' They failed to ask the tough questions of the President -- and they never forced a real debate in Washington over the fundamental question of going to war."

Dean cited a report from the Army War College that found that Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat to the United States and that the war was a distraction from the real threat of terror facing America; a report by the Carnegie Endowment that found no link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda; and former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's remarks that the administration was set on regime change in Iraq from day one.

Governor Dean's comments focused on his opponents' support for the war in Iraq and their failure to stand up to the President, adding:

"I ask Iowans to remember who stood up to the President a year ago, who stood up for what he believed, who stood up to say that this was the wrong war at the wrong time."

more....................

http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/003116.html#more

[Larkspur]

1. Dean's political courage opposing IWR and Iraq War vindicated

Unfortunately, hundreds of American and thousands of civilian Iraqi lives were lost due to that illbegotten war.

But O'Neill and the Army College's report do vindiate Dean's sound judgment and political courage in opposing that war and therefore, Dean has proven among the leading Dem contenders that he is the most fit to be President.

[killbotfactory]

2. The Army War College is full of peacenik anti-american radicals

If they had their way, Saddam would still be in power!

[HFishbine]

3. Aint that the truth

Some of them are even involved with the Project for a New American Century.

[Padraig18]

4. But, but, but, but....

... everyone who voted FOR the IWR says Dean is wrong! What do those pinkos at the Army War College know, any way? :P

[sangh0]

5. Dean:"It's Not Who Supported What Resolution"

except when "It IS who supported what resolution"

[sangh0]

7. "I think people are tired of debating who said what and when..."

unless it's Dean, who is not tired of debating who said what and when, unless it's about what Dean said and when

[DoveTurnedHawk]

17. Don't Confuse People With Facts, Sangha

Some of them are probably too busy clapping. Many Dean claps.

DTH

[sangh0]

21. "It's hard to criticize the president when you've got troops in the field"

Dean to ease up on Bush
http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/politics/5435514.htm

[sangh0]

23. 'If you don't do this, say, within 60 days, we will reserve our right as..

'If you don't do this, say, within 60 days, we will reserve our right as Americans to defend ourselves and we will go into Iraq.'"

-- Dean on CBS Face the Nation, Sept. 29, 2002
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/30/ftn/printable523726.shtml

[sangh0]

33. Dean supports unilateral war

and not one Dean supporter can refute that

[TLM]

16. What is it about quoting whole sentences that is so hard?

DEAN: Now, let me -- regarding the war, this is what's important: 12 Iowans hurt in attack in Iraq. It's not who voted for what resolution.



Clearly Dean is pointing out that dead and injured US soldiers are the truly important issue here... not who voted for what. Now I see why you cut out the rest of the statement. It really hammered home the betrayal that guys like Kerry and Gephardt have committed against Americans who now have their sons and daughters and fathers and brothers coming home in bags.



I disagreed with John Kerry and John Edwards and Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt and Wes Clark, who supported the war at the time.

And I stood up when nobody else was willing to stand up, except for Dennis Kucinich -- and of course we know that Al and Carol did not support that either -- but I stood up and said so on September 21, 2002, that this was a mistake because I did not believe at the time that the president was being candid.

Two days ago, Secretary of State Powell publicly said that there was no evidence that there was any link between Al Qaida and Saddam Hussein. Fifty percent of Americans believe that there is one. Why? Because the president of the United States has misled the American public and he's been misleading us for two years.

[sangh0]

19. Why does Dean's straight talk need so much explaining?

Clearly Dean is pointing out that dead and injured US soldiers are the truly important issue here

Ok, the TRULY important issue is dead soldiers, so Dean continues to whine about IWR even though "It's not who voted for what resolution"

[ProfessorPlum]

22. sorry dude,

you just earned my very first use of the eyeroll icon, if I can do it right.

Just a minute . . .

Ok, here goes: :eyes:

[sangh0]

25. Yeah, I've heard that before

Still waiting for a Dean supporter to provide some content

[PVnRT]

34. TLM just did

But, as usual, you choose to ignore it in your blind hatred of Dean. Sad, really.

[sangh0]

36. NO he didn't

I posted:

"Clearly Dean is pointing out that dead and injured US soldiers are the truly important issue here

Ok, the TRULY important issue is dead soldiers, so Dean continues to whine about IWR even though "It's not who voted for what resolution" "

No response from TLM. He has a history of doing that

[sfecap]

6. "I ask Iowans...."

"I ask Iowans to remember who stood up to the President a year ago, who stood up for what he believed, who stood up to say that this was the wrong war at the wrong time."



Never forget the * enablers:

Gephardt
Kerry
Lieberman
Edwards
Clark

[ProfessorPlum]

8. and Gephardt, of course

or was that implicit in that photo.

Holy Joe is just out of the frame, IIRC.

[paulk]

9. Dean has an opportunity to bash Bush

and instead he uses it to bash other Democrats.

[ProfessorPlum]

11. don't you worry

Smirky is getting (and will get) his, too.

[killbotfactory]

12. He bashed Bush

Unless "misleading the country into war" isn't a bash.

It's not Dean's fault his fellow democrats lacked the cajones to oppose Bush on this important issue.

[ProfessorPlum]

10. Wow,

I'm so impressed that he's using this information in such a timely way. Most of the times things are published, then picked up by some blogs, then maybe months later we hear about it. The AWC report and O'Neill's interviews just came out days ago - Way to go Dean!

I'm still impressed by his ability to use all of the resources at his disposal. He's a great campaigner.

[sandnsea]

13. The IWR card again

Dean can't do anything but lie about his trust in Bush, his support of Biden-Lugar, his demand for war if Saddam didn't comply with inspections. All he's got is the old IWR card. This is really getting old. If he's the better candidate to fix Iraq, he ought to just focus on his superior solutions.

[ProfessorPlum]

14. Oh this old topic

look at it this way, and forget the resolutions. Most everyone agrees that if something/one really is a threat, America should defend itself, with force, if necessary. All of the candidates agree with that, to my knowledge.

Dean said Bush hadn't proved Iraq was a threat, therefore war was a bad idea.

Now that we are almost certain that Iraq was not a threat, and that Bushco had no evidence to support that, it's clear that the war was definitely a bad idea.

I think the Dr. can crow just a little about this, don't you?

[sandnsea]

29. Dean said go in 30-60 days

Dean said Saddam was a threat. Dean said inspectors had to go back into Iraq. Dean didn't know diddily squat then and he doesn't know diddily squat now. Dean is not an anti-war candidate. His position was no different than the other candidates.

This is a ploy. Every time he can't move ahead on his "positive message", he rolls out the old war vote. Or lights the candles on his pity party cake, they're attackin' me ma!

A President. That's what we're electing. There's plenty of candidates with long records, real vision and ideas for change, real ability to get it done. That's what will win the election in November, not this ongoing pity party because the election was stolen in 2000. Kerry actually WAS right, it is damn time to quit crying in our teacups and get about the business of standing up and moving forward with a real Democratic message.

[ProfessorPlum]

31. sure you can go in 30-60 days

if Saddam was a proven threat. The Bushies never produced any proof! It's Dean's anti-war stance in the winter/spring that is at issue here, though (as we've said about a million times before), it unfortunately gets conflated with "the vote" in the fall, for a variety of reasons (and I admit, not the least of which is Dean himself, who uses it as shorthand).

The IWRers always want to defend that vote, too, when what they really should be doing is decrying their own silence as the invasion started sans proof of danger. There was a little bit of a peep from Kerry at that point, but the media and the rightwing (sorry to be redundant) shut him up. Dean didn't shut up.

As for teacups, I use mine to hold my bile over this unelected misadministration.

[TLM]

18. Stop trying to say Biden Lugar was the same as IWR that Kerry supported.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, October 2, 2002

WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today said that a bipartisan Senate compromise on a resolution allowing the President to use force to oust Saddam Hussein is far more faithful to the Constitution than the blank check resolution being lobbied for by the White House.

"Thankfully, this compromise embodies the lessons learned from the Gulf of Tonkin incident," said Timothy Edgar, an ACLU Legislative Counsel. "Granting the President a blank check to engage in overseas adventures is a recipe for human tragedy. This compromise resolution acknowledges those lessons."

In its letter to the Senate, the ACLU reiterated that it is neutral on whether the United States should go to war. However, it told the Senate that it remains firm in its conviction that the Constitutional obligations on Congress to make decisions about war need to be respected, especially with foreign policy questions of this magnitude.

The new resolution, negotiated by Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joseph Biden (D-DE) and Former Chairman Richard Lugar (R-IN), eliminates most of the similarities between the resolution the President wanted and the disastrous Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which led to a decade-long morass in which tens of thousands of Americans lost their lives.

Specifically, the Biden-Lugar compromise:

Clearly identifies the enemy. The proposed resolution closes the door to regional adventures in the Middle East. Under the proposed compromise, the President would have to seek additional Congressional authorization if he wished to widen the conflict in the region.

Spells out clear military objectives. Congress would hold a tight leash on the current conflict. This would be in marked contrast to its role in the Vietnam War, which was lost in part because of nebulous war aims. The Biden-Lugar compromise realizes the folly of sending troops into harm's way without delineating the specific military objectives to be accomplished.

Reaffirms the American conviction that war-making power should lie with the people. In contrast with the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, the Biden-Lugar compromise would respect the ongoing prerogatives of Congress during military engagement. The Constitution demands that American military decisions involving the use of force rest only with the people's representatives in Congress.

The ACLU's letter on the Biden-Lugar compromise can be found at:
http://archive.aclu.org/congress/l100202a.html

[sandnsea]

24. It authorized a war

Period. You can't be against a war all along when you supported war in any way, shape or form. Dean did. He is a made up anti-war candidate and anybody who cares to look at ALL the facts would know it.

Kucinich, he was for diplomacy alone to get inspectors back into Iraq. THAT is against the war from the start.

[edzontar]

27. Dean: right again on the war..and not "old news"

We are losng a dozen or more soldiers a week there, or haven't y'all noticed?

[killbotfactory]

28. Yawn...

Old News.

The other democrats might have made the same strategic error by pulling away resources from the war on terror to get us into an unwinnable guerrilla war in the most dangerous continent on Earth...

But they would have done it right, damnit!

[sandnsea]

30. Then Dean is at fault for their deaths

He should never have said Saddam was a threat, had WMD, inspectors needed to go in, and we should use military force if he didn't cooperate. Maybe if he hadn't said all of that, Bush wouldn't have lied in order to have his illegal war.

[ProfessorPlum]

32. I think that wins the tortured logic prize for today

congrats.

[rucky]

15. Can we call the Dems' IWR suppot a "strategic error"...

...and Move On?

[TLM]

20. I prefer to call it a cowardly and opportunistic betrayal

of everything our party is supposed to stand for.

[rucky]

26. You can support Dean & still keep the party intact

He's the real deal. Everybody who cares about the IWR already knows who voted for what and why. He got those Dems to explain themselves, and he's running away with the nomination largely because of it. Mission Accomplished. Dean has nothing further to gain by harping on it.

New Mission: He now has to work on mending the split.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

35. "who stood up to the President a year ago" Kucinich in Feb 2002?

Wow I am so glad Dean is giving props to Kucinich, oh wait he must not mean Kucinich because what Kucinich said below was 1 year and 11 months ago.

http://www.kucinich.us/speeches/speech1.htm

"Because we did not authorize the invasion of Iraq.
We did not authorize the invasion of Iran.
We did not authorize the invasion of North Korea.
We did not authorize the bombing of civilians in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize permanent detainees in Guantanamo Bay.
We did not authorize the withdrawal from the Geneva Convention.
We did not authorize military tribunals suspending due process and habeas corpus.
We did not authorize assassination squads.
We did not authorize the resurrection of COINTELPRO.
We did not authorize the repeal of the Bill of Rights.
We did not authorize the revocation of the Constitution.
We did not authorize national identity cards.
We did not authorize the eye of Big Brother to peer from cameras throughout our cities.
We did not authorize an eye for an eye.
Nor did we ask that the blood of innocent people, who perished on September 11, be avenged with the blood of innocent villagers in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize the administration to wage war anytime, anywhere, anyhow it pleases.
We did not authorize war without end.
We did not authorize a permanent war economy."
Snip------

*******************

notice the first line of this section... Dennis was taking the Bush admin to task on the illegal invasion of Iraq a year before it started.

So Dean is referring to himself again with:
"I ask Iowans to remember who stood up to the President a year ago, who stood up for what he believed, who stood up to say that this was the wrong war at the wrong time."

Is that like when you mean "major" but don't actually say it?

:)

TWL

[sangh0]

37. "It's hard to criticize the president when you've got troops in the field"

Dean to ease up on Bush
http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/politics/5435514.htm


Gotta love that consistent opposition from Dean!