Sunday, February 27, 2005

Bush Lied (or was it Boxer?)

It would be nice if the people who charge President Bush with lying about Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in Iraq as a justification for war there would actually read the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq. With all of the charges of "Bush lied, it's all about oil" that continue to poison the political discourse it would seem reasonable to review the actual document.

First of all, it was passed by large bi-partisan majorities in both the House and the Senate. Of course Sen. Boxer (Moonbat, CA) voted against the bill, a fact which she pointed out during Dr. Rice's confirmation hearings. Sen. Boxer said;
BOXER: Well, you should you read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not [did not read what they voted on also, perhaps - ed.], but most of my colleagues did. It was WMD, period. [pretty clear assertion - ed.] That was the reason and the causation for that particular vote. But again, I just feel, you quote President Bush when it suits you, but you contradicted him when he said, Yes, Saddam could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year. You go on television, nine months later, and said, Nobody ever said it was going to be.
So, what did the Resolution say? Twenty-three reasons are given for going to war with Iraq. Among the reasons are 17 which refer to reasons other than WMD (although in a few WMD is mentioned as one condition among others).
Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;
...

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998; [deals with inspections, not the weapons - ed.]
...

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people; [refers to known events that occurred, e.g. Halabja - ed.]

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;
...

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949; [emphasis mine - ed.]

Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677";

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1)," that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and "constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region," and that Congress, "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688";

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to "work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge" posed by Iraq and to "work for the necessary resolutions," while also making clear that "the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable";

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups [$25,000 to families of Palestinian terrorists, shelter, until it became inconvenient, of Abu Nidal, etc. - ed.] combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region;
So enough with "Bush lied - people died". THAT is the lie.

Read the Resolution.

1 comment:

Lee Keller King said...

It seems that some people don't like to be confused with the facts. In my office, I am surrounded by liberals (okay, at least two) who hate the President.

They are convinced that the whole issue of Weapons of Mass Destruction was created by the Bush Administration and "everybody knew" before the Iraq invasion that Saddam had no WMDs. When I suggest that not only the United States, but Great Britain, Germany and France, among other nations, thought Saddam had WMD, but the dispute was how to deal with him, they absolutely refuse to hear.

Of course, they also refuse to admit that we did not unilaterally invade Iraq and that we have many countries supporting us with money and men. Apparently, if France and Germany aren't there, we are "going it alone." I guess Great Britain, Italy, Australia, Poland, etc. don't matter in their world view.