John Kerry Lies About Reasons For Going To Iraq
June 17th, 2004
John Kerry, taking advantage of the media spin over the “findings” of the 9-11 Commission, said the report today clearly shows President Bush “rushed to war for a purpose that it now turns out is not supported by the facts.”
“This administration took its eye off of al-Qaida, took its eye off of the real war on terror in Afghanistan and northwest Pakistan and transferred it for reasons of its own to Iraq,” Kerry said. “And the American people are paying billions of dollars now because of that decision. And most importantly, American families and American soldiers are paying the highest price of all.”
Asked what Bush’s true motivation was for attacking Saddam’s government, Kerry said that is a question for the administration.
“It is clear that the president owes the American people a fundamental explanation about why he rushed to war for a purpose that it now turns out is not supported by the facts,” Kerry said. “And that is the finding of this commission.”
This is absolutely sad. Kerry is once again trying to spin the war on terror for his own political gain.
News flash for John Kerry: You are no longer running against Howard Dean.
Back in October of 2002, John Kerry gave a speech regarding his vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq. It didn’t mention Iraq’s ties to 9-11, and there is no mention of Al Qaeda.
Kerry was very clear back in October 2002, but he seems to have conveniently forgotten about what he said back then:
It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world. He has as much as promised it.
…[H]e is a brutal, oppressive dictator guilty of personally murdering and condoning murder and torture, grotesque violence against women and execution of political opponents. He is a war criminal who used chemical weapons against another nation, and of course, as we know, against his own people, the Kurds. He has diverted funds from the oil for food program which were intended by the international community to ease the burden of the Iraqi people. He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal and has given money to families of suicide bombers.
I mention these not because they are a cause to go to war in and of themselves - as the President previously suggested - but because they tell us a lot about the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction and the nature of this man. We should not go to war because these things are in his past but we should be prepared to go to war because of what they tell us about the future.
It is really sad that Kerry has to keep up this anti-war charade of his. Howard Dean is out of the race, he doesn’t have to pretend like he never supported taking out Saddam Hussein or that he was duped into supporting the war.
In Detroit, Kerry stopped by Fishbone’s restaurant in the city’s Greektown neighborhood, where Mark Ivezaj told him the commission’s findings could take him to victory on Nov. 2.
“Kerry, you got him,” Ivezaj said as the candidate greeted diners. “He lied about Iraq.”
Kerry also said Thursday that, as an American citizen and a senator, he felt misled by the Bush administration on the justification for war in Iraq.
Of course, Kerry’s own words contradict this. Kerry’s lies and contradiction are not going to propel him to victory – they’re just going to plummet him to defeat.
President Bush fired back against the “findings” of the 9-11 Commission:
“There was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al- Qaeda,” Bush told reporters after meeting with his Cabinet at the White House. “This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaeda. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda.”
…
“Saddam Hussein was a threat,” Bush said when asked about the report. “He was a threat because he had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. He was a threat because he was a sworn enemy of the United States of America, just like al- Qaeda. He was a threat because he had terrorist connections.”
“The world is better off and America is more secure without Saddam Hussein in power,” the president said.
Hearing Bush say these words, I wanted to cheer. You could hear the firmness in his voice. It’s what he’s been saying all along. John Kerry on the other hand, changed his approach during the primaries to save his campaign.
John Kerry said yesterday in Ohio “When it comes to war and peace, I will tell the truth to the American people.” Well, seems like he’s the one who isn’t telling us the truth right now. Perhaps he needs to go back and reread some of his speeches.
June 18th, 2004 at 11:27 am
What on earth are you trying to say here, Matt? Kerry: “I mention these not because they are a cause to go to war in and of themselves - as the President previously suggested - but because they tell us a lot about the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction and the nature of this man.” Bush misled us about WMD, and so Kerry is directly on point when he says that “It is clear that the president owes the American people a fundamental explanation about why he rushed to war for a purpose that it now turns out is not supported by the facts.”
June 18th, 2004 at 12:16 pm
Bush didn’t mislead anyone about WMD in iraq.. if he did then so did clinton, clinton’s entire administration, Daschle, Hillary, and yes, even Kerry and other democrats…
second, if you don’t understand the point of this blog entry, then i don’t know how to help you.
June 18th, 2004 at 12:41 pm
Dan, don’t be discouraged. Matt lets you know the reason he believes Bush… “The firmness of his voice.” Pesky facts can’t compete with vocal firmness.
June 18th, 2004 at 12:50 pm
Yeah, good one Cole…
June 18th, 2004 at 12:58 pm
Matt - Yes, Bush did mislead us about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The fact that some democrats were also misled by Bush doesn’t mean he didn’t mislead us. And Clinton’s assertions that he believed Iraq had WMDs is not the same thing as Bush telling us we need to go to war. I’ll tell you right now that the Cardinals are going to win the World Series. I believe it. But I’m not willing to attack another country based upon my level of belief.
Clinton believed Iraq had WMDs, but he also knew intelligence can be flawed (remember the aspirin factory?). Bush misled us into supporting a war.
June 18th, 2004 at 1:05 pm
That’s right… EVERYONE lied about it… silly me… i guess the WMD evidence they’ve already found is just irrelevant….
June 18th, 2004 at 2:22 pm
The UN said last week there was evidence. And evidence that the sites were disassembled and hidden or transported away. Continueing to deny this means one of two things: 1. you hate Bush so much you don’t care about the truth. or 2. You are stupid. (Actually, it may be a combination of both)
June 18th, 2004 at 2:34 pm
Facts are stubborn things for liberals.. they just can’t accept facts…
June 18th, 2004 at 3:03 pm
I read the UN report, in it they don’t make the claim that Saddam had WMD shipped out of Iraq. They say they found banned missle parts and lab equipment in scrap metal yards in the Netherlands and Turkey which they believe were found by looters and sold as scrap metal.
June 18th, 2004 at 6:00 pm
Uh huh. How does that conflict with my last statement? And - that is just some of the material - yes? Oh - just for reference - prohibited WMD included: Gas weapons (biological, nerve, and blistering agents), nuclear weapons, and as defined by the UN for Iraq- long range missles. Now, nerve and blistering agents have been found in roadside bombs - which PROVES they exist. The question is where are the rest. Missle parets showing up overseas - PROVES they existed. Again, where are the rest? Iraq War veterans understand now why most Viet Nam vets hate Kerry.
June 18th, 2004 at 8:45 pm
Those chemical weapons are old, the original UN inspection team believed 95% of Iraqi WMD had been destoryed, 100% could not be verified because Iraq destoryed some weapons that it never accounted for. The mustard gas shell was ineffective and deteriorating, the sarin shell needed to be mixed and was also old. Its not proof that Iraq had restarted its programs and was able to produce new weapons, Hans Blix’s team was given unlimited access and accounted anything near suspicous that could be used. Those kind of missles have been given up to UN inspectors previously, and they are not weapons of mass destruction but a form of banned armament.
June 19th, 2004 at 12:04 am
Miles, the age of the WMD is not necesarily relevent. the sarin gas that was discovered was NEVER DECLARED to inspectors.
June 19th, 2004 at 1:10 am
Miles, Matt is correct. And - you are adding conditions that did not and do not exist. They had - at least plans for more gas weapons and evidence shows research. And, they had weapons. When is the last time we made these weapons ourselves? Want to open one up in your living room and test your theories on age and nerve gas effectiveness? My grandfather was lighly gassed in World War One with mustard gas. He has periodic nose bleeds and breathing problems until he died in 1963. That translates to 44 years of suffering. I think, after seeing that as a young child - that I appreciate how awful these weapons are. And he was one of the survivors from his unit.
June 19th, 2004 at 3:26 pm
Yes if that sarin shell had been used corrrectly it would have meant hell. But pure sarin can’t be stored very long, the shell contained chemicals that when mixed create it. Much of the information about it is still unsubstaniated. I have heard it to be anywhere from a dud that did not go off in a test two decades ago and was just laying in the desert to it being an American made weapon that was given to Saddam in the 80s. The chief inspector and Rumsfeld both when asked about the shell talked about the thing cautiously, they didn’t hail it as justification. Inspectors should release more information on it, they can prove what it is and how old it is and theres no reason not to tell concerned Americans.
June 19th, 2004 at 3:45 pm
the binary form of sarin found was NEVER declared by the regime. Now, despite your “unsubstantiated” accusations, knowing the fact that these were never declared as having been possesed by the regime, doesn’t that concern you about what ELSE was not declared???? doesn’t the fact this stuff was unmarked trouble you??? Doesn’t all the other evidence of WMD discovered trouble you????
Maybe if Clinton was still in office you’d think differently.
June 19th, 2004 at 8:20 pm
Iraq did declare the binary chemicals for sarin.
“Saddam’s government had disclosed binary sarin testing and production”
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_sarin_051804,00.html
“Iraq acknowledges that it had or was on the brink of having the capability to produce in quantity the precursors for tabun (GA): D4 and phosphorous oxychloride (POCl3), the sarin/cyclosarin (GB/GF) precursors: methylphosphonyl difluoride (DF), methyl phosphonyl dichloride (MPC), dimethylmethyl phosphonate (DMMP), trimethylphosphite (TMP), hydrogen fluoride (HF), phosphorous trichloride (PCl3) and thionyl chloride (SOCl2).”
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/cw/program.htm
I didn’t really like Clinton, and of course I am concerned about WMD in Iraq, I just don’t think the war was the best way to get rid of the threat. I am also concerned about WMD in other countries like North Korea and stray ones in Russia, I think those should have be given equal attention and resources.
June 21st, 2004 at 4:24 pm
There were 15 pre-1991 sarin bombs that were not accounted for. This was probably one of them. The insurgents didn’t know what they had, or it wouldn’t have been planted as a roadside bomb. What is truly idiotic is the argument that WMDs were shipped out just before the war.
June 21st, 2004 at 10:02 pm
Jay, Why is that idiotic? They flew the Air Force to Iran in the first war.
July 3rd, 2004 at 2:20 am
Because the Iranians would turn around and use those WMD on Iraq like they did in the Iran-Iraq war.
It would also take more than a few fighter planes to fly them out.