Letter to the Editor

This is a copy of the Letter to the Editor that I sent to my hometown paper for the March 4th edition. It was in response to a letter posted in the February 25th edition of the paper, which was written in response to my letter in the February 18th edition.

The respondent listed a whole host of accusations leveled against the Bush Administration. She wrote, "What follows is just a few of the mud-encrusted slime the Bush Administration has pulled on the American people.

Creating a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false case for war against Iraq; misrepresentation of Iraq as a security threat as part of a justification for a war of aggression; lying to the American people and members of Congress regarding WMDs; misspending funds to secretly begin a war of aggression; invading Iraq in violation of the requirements of HJ Res 114; invading Iraq absent a declaration of war; failing to provide soldiers with body armor and vehicle armor; falsifying accounts of U.S. troop deaths and injuries for political purposes; outing secret agent Valeria Plame Wilson; providing immunity from prosecution for criminal contractors in Iraq; imprisoning children; creating secret laws; spying on American citizens without a court ordered warrant in violation of the law and the fourth amendment; using telecommunication companies to create an illegal and unconstitutional database of the private communication of American citizens; using signing statements with intent to violate the law; failing to comply with congressional subpoenas and instructing former employees not to comply; conspiracy to violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965; and repeatedly ignoring high-level intelligence warnings of planned terrorist attacks in the U.S. PRIOR to 9/11."

In response, I wrote the following letter:

That’s better! It’s easier to discuss the issues when there are specific things to discuss, rather than open ended generalizations.

There is nothing new on that laundry list of accusations against the Bush Administration; and none of them have been discovered since President Bush left office. They were all made over the past seven years.

I do not pretend to understand all of the accusations leveled against the Bush Administration for the actions they took in the fight against terrorism, nor do I necessarily believe all of their actions were justified. But what I do believe is that they did what they felt was necessary to protect the American people and to fight an enemy that does not value human life as we do; an enemy that will stop at nothing to achieve their heinous goal.

If we can all be honest with ourselves and each other, we should be able to admit that President Bush’s presidency took a drastic turn on September 11, 2001. He did not come into office planning to send young American soldiers to war. But he probably knew that as the president, it might be his unfortunate duty one day. President Bush did not ask for the fight that was brought to our shores that fateful morning, but when called upon, he responded.

There is not enough space in this section of the paper for me to address each accusation on that list. Perhaps I will address them at a later date or maybe I’ll just consign my responses to my blog. However, I will take the time to address the two issues that I am tired of hearing put forth by the left.

Were there or weren’t there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and was Saddam Hussein a serious threat? It’s really too bad President Bush didn’t have access to a crystal ball so that he could have had those questions answered prior to sending our troops into Iraq. Unfortunately he didn’t.

Hind sight is 20/20 and it has given President Bush’s detractors the opportunity to conveniently forget what they said about Iraq’s WMD program and the seriousness of the Iraqi threat leading up to the war.

Much of the world believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam Hussein was a serious threat. It is well known that Saddam Hussein used lethal gas against the Kurdish town of Halabja on March 16, 1988; killing thousands of innocent people…his own people.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1441, which offered Iraq “a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations"; was adopted unanimously by the UNSC on November 8, 2002. This same opportunity had been set forth by the UNSC in Resolution 660 (1990), Resolution 661 (1990), Resolution 678 (1990), Resolution 686 (1991), Resolution 687 (1991), Resolution 688 (1991), Resolution 986 (1995), and Resolution 1284 (1999).

Under the terms stated in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 (2002), “Iraq was in material breach of the cease fire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction, but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments…"

Tell me, did President Bush’s supposed “secret propaganda campaign” influence the U.N.? Did his influence extend to the intelligence agencies of other countries around the world? I am of the opinion that it was the other way around. I think that the U.N.’s overwhelming belief that Iraq had WMDs; combined with Saddam Hussein’s constant saber rattling and refusal to comply with U.N. resolution after resolution, contributed strongly to Bush’s belief in that fact.

In our own government, many high ranking Democrats believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam Hussein posed a serious threat dating back to the Clinton years and just prior to the war. Here are just a few examples:

“We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century. They feed on the free flow of information and technology. They actually take advantage of the freer movement of people, information and ideas. And they will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us.” (President Clinton, remarks to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff, 2 /17/98)

“Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq...Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.” (Text of Clinton statement on Iraq attack, Agence France Presse, 12/17/98)

What? President Clinton attacked Iraq, even though they never attacked us? Say it isn’t so! I don’t remember there being any outrage or public outcry…was there?

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." (Representative Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998)

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." (Letter to President Bush, signed by Senator Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001)

Who misrepresented Iraq as a security threat and who lied to who? Is it possible that members of Congress lied to Bush? I guess the slogan, "Graham Lied, People Died" just didn't have the same ring to it.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." (Senator Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002)

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." (Senator Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002)

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime....He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction....So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real...." (Senator John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003)

“If you don't believe...Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me.” (Senator John Kerry; “On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd” by Ronald Brownstein; Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)

It’s hard to take the self-righteous indignation displayed by all these Democrats against the Bush Administration when they themselves made a case against Iraq. If WMDs had been found, they would have been patting themselves on the back and telling us that Bush couldn’t have done it without their support. But, since no WMDs were discovered, they have found it very easy and convenient to say that he did it without their support and no one bats an eye.

George Piro, an FBI Agent who interrogated Saddam Hussein for seven months, related in a “Sixty Minutes” program on January 27, 2008 that Hussein got rid of his WMDs in the 1990s. He refused to prove that he no longer had WMDs because he feared revealing Iraq's weakness to its real enemy, Iran, and he believed that the perception of WMDs would maintain his prestige at home. He also believed that the worst that President George W. Bush would do to him was to drop some bombs, the way President Clinton had done in 1998.

In addition, according to Piro, Saddam had told him that he had planned on restarting his WMD program in all phases--"chemical, biological and nuclear"--within a year after the lifting of U.N. sanctions. His plan was set back, but not eliminated, by the 9/11 attacks and the reactions to them.

There is evidence that Iraq had WMDs and some materials used in their construction were found in bunkers. We also know that Hussein was not afraid to use them...he had done it before. Where Iraq's WMDs are now is any body’s guess. Some speculate that they were moved to Syria or to Pakistan. We may never know what really happened to them.

I am thankful I only have to protect my little plot of land in Clatskanie. Thankfully, I am not responsible for protecting the lives of over 300 million Americans. I don’t have to wake up every morning to intelligence briefings that would terrify the faint of heart nor lay down at night hoping I did everything I could to protect this nation and its people. I don’t have to be concerned day in and day out with where or when the next attack on America might strike and how many people it might kill. I don’t have to worry about sending young men and women into harms way and then feeling responsible when their lives are tragically taken on a battlefield far from home. That weight was on the shoulders of George W. Bush, now it rests on the shoulders of President Obama. Let’s see how he handles it.