Bradley in DC
10-11-2007, 12:10 AM
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=The+Iraq+war%3a+An+assessmen t%2c+five+years+on&articleId=bb728bd9-a1bf-44ae-8189-0b5196e3281b
The Iraq war: An assessment, five years on
BEFORE THE Oct. 11, 2002, Senate vote authorizing the United States to use military force against Iraq, one senator said the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction "may not be imminent. But it is real. It is growing. And it cannot be ignored."
That was Sen. Tom Daschle, D-N.D., the majority leader.
Said another senator, "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of Sept. 11, 2001.
"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
That was Sen. Hillary Clinton.
The nearly universal consensus on that day was that Iraq either had or was developing weapons of mass destruction. That belief was shared by the governments of France, Britain and Germany as well as the United States. Sen. Clinton called that assessment "undisputed."
Iraq's possession of such weapons was later found to have been overestimated. Iraq's pursuit of such weapon-making capacity, however, was not debunked. Saddam Hussein was bluffing about his capabilities, but was planning to rebuild them as soon as he could.
And although President Bush made the most of the weapons of mass destruction argument, it is a myth manufactured by war opponents that this was the only justification for war. It was one of many accepted by Democrats and Republicans alike in the summer of 2002.
This June, Sen. Clinton took to calling the Iraq war "Bush's war." It was America's war, then and now.
Today is the fifth anniversary of the Senate vote authorizing the war. Sen. Barack Obama is making the most of this date.
Five years on, his Oct. 2, 2002, speech opposing the war looks analytically sound when compared to many speeches supporting the war, and that is a well-earned point of pride for him. But wars can be long endeavors, and the negative effects he predicted then may yet turn positive in a relatively short time.
What no one who backed the war then knew was how wrong the world's intelligence agencies were and how poorly the war would be managed. The Iraq war has been a tragedy of errors. But it would compound those errors to end it with an abrupt retreat. As brutal and depressing as these last four years of war have been, there is indeed light ahead, a chance for hard-earned victory.
We must maintain the resolve to pursue that victory while it remains attainable. Giving up while there are signs of success just because the fight is hard and costly is to bring about our own defeat. That is not the American way. We must reject such calls as unworthy of our great nation and of the men and women who sacrificed so much to do the job their country called them to do in a distant and desolate land.
The Iraq war: An assessment, five years on
BEFORE THE Oct. 11, 2002, Senate vote authorizing the United States to use military force against Iraq, one senator said the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction "may not be imminent. But it is real. It is growing. And it cannot be ignored."
That was Sen. Tom Daschle, D-N.D., the majority leader.
Said another senator, "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of Sept. 11, 2001.
"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
That was Sen. Hillary Clinton.
The nearly universal consensus on that day was that Iraq either had or was developing weapons of mass destruction. That belief was shared by the governments of France, Britain and Germany as well as the United States. Sen. Clinton called that assessment "undisputed."
Iraq's possession of such weapons was later found to have been overestimated. Iraq's pursuit of such weapon-making capacity, however, was not debunked. Saddam Hussein was bluffing about his capabilities, but was planning to rebuild them as soon as he could.
And although President Bush made the most of the weapons of mass destruction argument, it is a myth manufactured by war opponents that this was the only justification for war. It was one of many accepted by Democrats and Republicans alike in the summer of 2002.
This June, Sen. Clinton took to calling the Iraq war "Bush's war." It was America's war, then and now.
Today is the fifth anniversary of the Senate vote authorizing the war. Sen. Barack Obama is making the most of this date.
Five years on, his Oct. 2, 2002, speech opposing the war looks analytically sound when compared to many speeches supporting the war, and that is a well-earned point of pride for him. But wars can be long endeavors, and the negative effects he predicted then may yet turn positive in a relatively short time.
What no one who backed the war then knew was how wrong the world's intelligence agencies were and how poorly the war would be managed. The Iraq war has been a tragedy of errors. But it would compound those errors to end it with an abrupt retreat. As brutal and depressing as these last four years of war have been, there is indeed light ahead, a chance for hard-earned victory.
We must maintain the resolve to pursue that victory while it remains attainable. Giving up while there are signs of success just because the fight is hard and costly is to bring about our own defeat. That is not the American way. We must reject such calls as unworthy of our great nation and of the men and women who sacrificed so much to do the job their country called them to do in a distant and desolate land.