SwiftVets.com

[Son of a VET]

Cheney: Weapons Report Justifies Iraq War

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041007/D85IL4VG1.html

I hope Bush hammers this home friday.
_________________

Stolen Honor

[noc]

The report shows that "delay, defer, wasn't an option," Cheney told a town-hall style meeting.

Great point here.

[homesteader]

Let's assume for a moment that Saddam did not have stockpiles of WMDs in 2003. If that were true Saddam was the most foolish of men. Remember the old commercial "It's not nice to fool with mother nature".

Without WMDs Saddam was behaving and sounding like he had them. His goons were playing shell games and hide-and-seek with everyone who was trying to get the truth. He convinced everyone to include other Arab leaders and his own troops, even Kerry and Edwards that he had them. Protective gear was found on the front lines, and on and on.

After 9/11 Saddam should have figured out it was "not smart to play cute with a wounded superpower." Instead he carried on with his games and ended up in a spider hole. What a price to pay just to maintain the illusion that he had WMDs.

Cheney is right. If Saddam did not have them, he sure played his cards wrong.

Lesson: Don't mess with us!

[Dimsdale]

Kerry and Edwards continually inply that they "woulda' done it different" if they had been in charge.

Unfortunately for them, neither their comments or their votes, based on the same information the President had available to him, back up that claim. Their protestations and criticisms are all based on hindsight. Well, hindsight in 2003 said Saddam had WMDs, and would make them available to the terrorists if he had the chance.

The President had to act on available intel, at that time, and assuming the worst case scenario. To do less would have been a betrayal of his oath to protect the United States.

Kerry would have talked and talked and talked, before he finally he went through the predictable cycle of appeasement and blocked inspections that didn't work before. Saddam would still be dictator, and Ghaddafi would still have the WMDs that nobody knew he had, possibly available to the highest bidder.

Kerry would have, and would, make the world less safe, and weaken the US in the process.
_________________
Everytime he had a choice, Kerry chose to side with communists rather than the United States.

[jataylor11]

Another Kerry Flip-flop (or logic lapse)

12 years of circumventing UN sanctions is a RUSH to war

versus

4 months and 3 scratches result in a RUSH to leave Vietnam

4 months in Vietnam 30 years ago is sufficient to lead a nation in war

versus

3 years of stellar leadership

[jimlarsen]

I wish the Bush campaign would point out just how absurd waiting would have been. In my opinion, some of the reasons are:

1. Inspectors were made to wait hours to get into a facility, allowing time for banned materials to be moved.
2. Saddam was firing missiles at our recon planes.
3. Iraq was a potential haven for terrorists.
4. France and Russia were getting rich off the oil for food program while Saddam diverted some of the money and materials to his weapons programs.
5. Saddam was confidant that he was safe because the UN had done nothing about his non-compliance. This gave us the advantage of surprise at the time of the attack. That advantage would have eroded if we had rattled our sabers for a few months before attacking.

[msindependent]

Everybody and their dog thought that Saddam had them. So, everybody was wrong? I doubt it. I'm a bit concerned about where they are now. I hope they are buried and not in Syria.

[Anker-Klanker]