You Can Learn A Lot From The New York Times
If you are willing to skip the editorial page and the opinion pages and draw your own conclusions from the news, this Friday's (October 8, 2004) New York Times is a gem. There are three prominent articles that when taken in as a whole, amount to a complete refutation of John Kerry's entire position on Iraq.
Finally; "U.S. Report Says Hussein Bought Arms With Ease" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/08/politics/08sanctions.html?ex=1098432310&ei=1&en=81feee72ee642926 is on page one. This article notes that the Duelfer report states that Saddam Hussein used the U.N. Oil For Food program to raise billions of dollars doing business with "...six governments and private companies from a dozen other nations that were willing to ignore sanctions prohibiting arms sales... which included components of long range missiles, spare parts for tanks and night vision equipment." It goes on to state that: "Prohibited goods and weapons were being shipped into Iraq with virtually no problem."
The Times also points out that, "Iraq went to great lengths to build a missle system with a range longer than the limits imposed by the United Nations..." This is a key point, because the UN weapons inspectors (who, by the way, returned to Iraq as a direct response to President Bush's showdown with Saddam) were In Iraq looking for illegal missle systems along with WMD.
The next article: "French Play Down Report of Bribes in Iraq Scandal"
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/08/international/europe/08france.html?ex=1098433386&ei=1&en=d1c62fe8e695ec86This cites Charles A. Duelfer, in his report as saying that millions of barrels of discounted oil were sold to French officials "...to encourage France's support for Iraq in the Security Council."
The final article: "Inspector's Report Says Hussein Expected Guerrilla War," http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/08/politics/08intel.html?ex=1098433940&ei=1&en=22ef990e96b05002
also citing the Duelfer report, states that according to extended interrogations of Mr. Hussein and his top deputies, that "...from August 2002 to January 2003, Army leaders were ordered to move and hide weapons and other milliatry equipment at off-base locations including farms and homes." According to the Times, "...the Duelfer Report describes the M14 Unit (Iraqi Intelligence) as having trained Iraqis, Palestinians, Syrians , Yemeni, Lebansese, Egyptian and Sudanese operatives in in counterterroism, explosives, marksmanship and foreign operations..."
If you just follow the T.V. news, or only read the headlines, you would think that all that the Duelfer report said was that Saddam had no WMD. The above articles demonstrate the pattent untruth of that conception.
Now, let's get to Mr. Kerry's position. The war was unwise because:
- Saddam did not posses prohibited weapons.
- We should have given our allies, such as the French, more time and incentive to put pressure on Iraq.
- We should have spent more time working with the U.N. and waiting until we were ready to effectively occupy Iraq. Then, there would have been less violence and chaos, if and when we finally did have to go in.
- Saddam did posses prohibited weapons and was acquiring more.
- The French and many others who opposed our stance on Iraq were not reluctant allies, but adversaries, who were paid off to oppose us in the U.N.
- The time we did spend with the U.N. (August 2001 to January 2003) was the exact time period that according to Saddam's people, that they were planning the current insurgency. We gave them too much time. More waiting would have been more tragic.