Carol Platt Liebau: An Important Message

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

An Important Message

Over at Townhall, Lorie Byrd writes about the urgent necessity of Republicans pointing out Democrats' utter incompetence on national security -- and how it threatens America.

Check it out.

12 Comments:

Anonymous GHelton said...

I was upset with the Republicans in the Senate for passing a No Confidence measure. I am still upset.

But I felt better when the Republicans in the House chose a different option. They called the Democrats' bluff. Great move!

Now I believe the White House is showing that they are determined to stay on message. That message is that 1.) We are the good guys. 2.) We are on a noble mission. 3.) We are winning. 4.) The Democrats are beyond irresponsible, they are dangerous!

I disagree with the many who think the White House waited too long to fight back against the enemies of victory. They say the President should have been making these arguments forcefully and repeatedly for a year or more. I say that would have resulted in burn out.

Instead, whether by Rovian design or not, the Democrats have made this their single issue. And they've placed so much importance on winning the public over to their losing policy that they can't turn back now.

By waiting as long as he did, the President has allowed the Democrats to go on record time and again making their case for defeat in Iraq. They can't turn back now.

Now the President has the floor. And, if he's smart (and I believe he is), he'll maintain this present course until the Democrats are so humiliated they can only win in the bluest of districts in 2006.

Perhaps the timeing couldn't have been better.

If the President's strategy versus the losers on the left was to let them chatter themselves into a corner as long as possible, that strategy has been aided immensely by the utter lack of viable alternatives offered by the Democrats.

I see overwhelming political, military, and foreign policy victories in 2006 and 2008.

But I'm still angry with the Senate Republicans!

1:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Clinton, of course, DID take action against Saddam Hussein, a la Operation Desert Fox. This completely nullified any remnants of Saddam's WMD program. Between that and the sanctions.

Clinton, of course, THWARTED the millenium bombing plot. Bush, on the other hand, was on watch during the worst attack in this nation's history.

Bottom line, the Bush administration has made this country less safe.

1:14 PM  
Blogger Dan M said...

Clinton himself said of the Desert Fox strikes: "We might have gotten all of it, we might have gotten some of it, and we might have gotten none of it."

That's the problem when you have a incompetent Intelligence agency. Which also highlights the problem with the comments of the Dems over our movement on Saddam. They seem to be of the opinion that our intelligence agency can know, omnisceint like, what the exact state of any WMD program is, and at exactly which date, indeed the hour that such a program reaches a critical state.

Bur in the real world, responsible leaders like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld NEVER have crystal clear intelligence on just about any national security problem. Recall the CIA's famously erroneous assessments on the former Soviet Union. I recall reading about the "Team B" disputes that rocked the agency way back in the '70s.

And upon the professionalism of such an flawed agency, the Left would predicate American security.

I got a better idea. When a Muslim leader such as Saddam, or a whacked out Mullah brags and boasts of their WMD programs, take the dirtball deadly seriously. And take 'em out.

4:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, I feel so much safer with Bush inflaming the entire Muslim world while ignoring our borders and ports.

Did you know that for what we spend on five days of the war in Iraq, we could outfit every single port in the world with radiation detectors?

But we can't afford that. We have to score more of those tax cuts for the greedy swine who couldn't care less that they're saddling their kids with more debt. Just 'gimme, gimme, gimme.'

But if the Monkey-Faced Retard says we're safer, we must be.

6:08 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Dan M is either mistaken or has just publically called the Vice President of the United States a liar.

Dan M claimed, "Bur in the real world, responsible leaders like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld NEVER have crystal clear intelligence on just about any national security problem."

Vice President Dick Cheney said in August of 2002, " Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us. "

"No doubt" sounds exactly like Dick Cheney is claiming "crystal clear intelligence."

So which is it Dan, are you mistaken or did Dick Cheney lie? Once again, inquiring minds want to know.

6:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

Funny, that's exactly what he said to the Pentagon analysts when he called to say he would be needing some reports soon.

7:45 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Funny, that's exactly what he said to the Pentagon analysts when he called to say he would be needing some reports soon.

As he looked at pictures of their spouses and children on their desk and said, "It would be a shame if what happened to Valerie Plame happened to your love ones."

9:08 PM  
Blogger Dan M said...

Good grief, the happiness and the eagerness with which the Left dives into the weeds on the WMD intel is truly beyond me.

So I called the VP a liar? Tenet comes and tells him and the President that it's a "slam dunk." Every intel agency of note across the world agrees. The German one even estimates the threat as far GRAVER than does our own CIA. But still the basis of the estimate was predicated upon what we knew he had at one time.

So Blix was sent. Blix was told they destroyed it. So Blix says take us to where it was destroyed, Saddam says NO. So Blix says fine. Just give us the paperwork concerning the destruction, to which Saddam says NO. So finally Blix says, let us talk with those who carried out the destruction of the WMD, and again Saddam says NO.

And this was nothing but a variant on a constant theme that played throughout the '90s, {which Clinton used to highlight the options posed prior to his launching Desert Fox, where he decries some "vague 3d way" of trying to deal with Saddam}. So Blix comes back and writes his report, and even he sadly concluded that Saddam did not meet HIS POSITIVE OBLIGATION to account for his WMD program and products.

Now Saddam had used his WMD. That placed him in a very unique group, because other than the KGB in Afghanistan, no other country since the end of the Cold War had actually used WMD.

Which what? Did that tend to increase the threat estimate he posed, or did it tend to decrease it?

So the CIA, which is effectively out of the Spy business, and into relying on techno wizardry to garner intel, comes to the totally rational conclusion that Saddam has WMD.

As a logical conclusion, that was unassailable. As we found out after taking the lunatic out, as a practical matter, it turned out otherwise.

I, on the other hand, am not convinced that he did not have WMD. GW gave him 15 months to get rid of what he had. And as Colin Powell revealed when he played that taped conversation of Iraqi officers DISCUSSING the destruction of WMD prior to a UN inspection, there was a whole lot of activity occurring for a program that was non-existent.

But if you read David Kay's FULL report, instead of AP takes thereof, you will see that Kay OFFICIALLY CONCLUDED that Saddam DID HAVE A VAST BIO PROGRAM. And that program constituted a deadly menace to the free world.

Go read the report, and get your head out of the Daily Kos, the DU, and other dubious founts of information.

12:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I, on the other hand, am not convinced that he did not have WMD."

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

7:11 AM  
Anonymous GHelton said...

Remeber, Anoymous, millions of those Muslems in the "Inflamed Entire Muslem World" joyfully risked life and limb to vote in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Encouraged by this, thousands more of those "Inflamed Entire Muslem World" protested for democratic reform in Lebanon against a brutal Syrian occupation. The Syrians were forced to leave Lebanon.

Thousands of the "Inflamed Entire Muslem World" demonstrate weekly (not weakly) against the fascist Mullahs in Iran, risking life and limb and family for democratic reform. They've been doing this for years.

And let's not forget Lybia, and Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, and ...

Maybe the Entire Muslem World desperately NEEDED to be thusly Inflamed.

7:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's right, it's a great idea to go whack at the hornets nest on the back porch without closing the windows first. Still waiting for some reason why Dubya can't find the will or the way to do anything about port security or protecting our borders. Because he SAYS we're safer doesn't MEAN we're safer, just as SAYING Iraq is a terrorist haven doesn't mean it IS one. (Well, I'll have to give him credit on that one -- it indeed BECAME one.)

You guys are pathetic. Your arguments over why the invasion of Iraq was such a great idea seem to morph daily.

8:17 AM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Dan M posts the same claims that have been refuted on this blog numerous times already...

"I, on the other hand, am not convinced that he did not have WMD. GW gave him 15 months to get rid of what he had. And as Colin Powell revealed when he played that taped conversation of Iraqi officers DISCUSSING the destruction of WMD prior to a UN inspection, there was a whole lot of activity occurring for a program that was non-existent.

But if you read David Kay's FULL report, instead of AP takes thereof, you will see that Kay OFFICIALLY CONCLUDED that Saddam DID HAVE A VAST BIO PROGRAM. And that program constituted a deadly menace to the free world."


Okay, first just a point for the confused--David Kay served as the initial head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), which was tasked with finding the WMD in Iraq after the invasion. He resigned his post and provided an interim report. The most well known statement David Kay made about Iraq and WMD was that "We were all wrong."

Anyway, the final report by the ISG is known as the Deulfer Report, and is the official US government statement n Iraq and WMD. Here are some verbatim quotes from the Deulfer Report on WMD and Iraq...

Nuclear Weapons:
Iraq Survey Group (ISG) discovered further evidence of the maturity and significance of the pre-1991 Iraqi Nuclear Program but found that Iraq’s ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program progressively decayed after that date.

Chemical Weapons:
While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter...

Biological Weapons:
In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain advanced BW weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes. Indeed, from the mid-1990s, despite evidence of continuing interest in nuclear and chemical weapons, there appears to be a complete absence of discussion or even interest in BW at the Presidential level.

I included a little bit extra on biological weapons as Dan M seems to be confused as to what the official US position is with respect to Iraq and BW.

I am curious as to where Dan gets claims like "I, on the other hand, am not convinced that he did not have WMD. GW gave him 15 months to get rid of what he had." According to the ISG, nuclear and chemical weapons programs were gone by 1991 and BW programs ended in 1996. All of this was well before the magnanimous GW gave Iraq 15 months.

8:44 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google