|
You
Voted For It, You Own It
The
congressmen and senators who lined up to cast their yeas and
nays on Oct. 11, 2002, knew that they were casting one of
the most, if not the most, important votes of their political
careers. Public Law 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502, the result
of the vote to authorize the Bush administration to attack
Iraq, would have incalculable moral, economic and geopolitical
implications for the long-term future of the United States.
But not every congressman put the interests of his country
ahead of his career prospects. With George W. Bush still riding
high in the polls less than a year after 9/11, it took courage
and foresight—the ability to see a future in which the public
would sour on Bush and his wars—to defy him.
As is often the case during times of crisis, when history
tests the mettle of men and women, courage and foresight were
in short supply. Fewer than a third—156 out of 529—dared to
vote no.
Four years later, the Iraq war resolution reads like a classic
of embarrassingly brazen propaganda. It says that Iraq posed
a “threat to the national security of the United States,”
something that anyone with access to a map knew couldn’t possibly
be true. (Iraq’s longest-range missiles had a maximum range
of 500 miles.) It includes the debunked statements that Iraq
had “a significant chemical and biological weapons capability”
and was “actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability” [presumably
a reference to Bush’s phony Niger yellowcake uranium claim].
It’s obvious to the 59 percent of Americans who think the
war was a mistake that the 296 representatives and 77 senators
who voted for this ridiculous tripe showed a spectacular lack
of good judgment. As a result, nearly 2,500 American troops
are dead. So are 200,000 Iraqis. Between 18,000 and 48,000
U.S. troops have been wounded. We have no idea how many Iraqis
have been crippled—perhaps over one million. Nearly $300 billion—more
than 100 times the total amount spent to protect American
cities from another 9/11—has been wasted.
If Iraq were a stock, it would be Enron. Thousands killed
and billions spent, but what return have we received on our
investment? The contempt of the entire world, radicalizing
Muslims, soaring debts and the disturbing confirmation that
our troops include mass murderers as well as torturers and
concentration camp guards. Iraqi resistance fighters, outgunned
and outmanned, own the cities and roadways.
Are we losing? Only an optimist would say that. We lost before
we started.
This mess was predictable. In fact, I predicted it. So did
many others. Still, the 374 politicians who voted for the
war can reasonably argue this dismal outcome wasn’t set in
stone. Smarter execution of the war—emphasizing the security
of Iraqi civilians over our own troops, staying away from
charlatans like Ahmed Chalabi, protecting Iraq’s Sunni minority—might
have mitigated some of the chaos.
Only a total idiot, however, could have bought the most bald-faced
lie in the 2002 war resolution: conflating Iraq with the 9/11
terrorists. Accusing Iraq of “continuing to aid and harboring
terrorist organizations” like Al Qaeda, the resolution contains
19 variants of the word “terrorism” and 10 references to “September
11, 2001.” But Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Iraq couldn’t
have been involved because Saddam was a socialist secularist
whose Iraq encouraged women to work in top jobs, whereas Osama
bin Laden’s Al Qaeda are radical Islamists seeking to establish
a medieval caliphate where the only good woman is veiled behind
a burqa. Saddam and Al Qaeda were mortal enemies. Everyone
knew that.
Now that the political winds have changed, our wormy “leaders”
are backing away from having voted for the war in October
2002.
“If
Congress had been asked [to authorize the war], based on what
we know now, we never would have agreed,” probable 2008 presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton backtracked in a fundraising letter
to Democrats. “Americans should argue about the war,” now
allows John McCain, a slimy Republican who argued on the senate
floor in 2002 that “giving peace a chance only gives Saddam
Hussein more time to prepare for war.”
Hecklers are tormenting Clinton and McCain at campaign appearances
with reminders of their pro-war votes. “I think I was wrong
to vote for the war,” admits John Edwards, who will probably
watch ’08 from the sidelines in preparation for a run in 2012
or 2016.
Second-tier Democratic hopeful Mark Warner, reflecting the
militant moderation of state-controlled media, warns against
speaking ill of the politically brain-dead: “I don’t think
any U.S. senator, regardless of party, if they had known there
weren’t WMD, that we were going to get selected leaks, I don’t
think they would have voted for it. Second-guessing people
who made a valiant attempt at judgment is not where I am at.”
It ought to be. It ought to be where we’re all at. Our elected
representatives are paid to make the right choices for our
country and its future. They deserve to be held accountable
when they fail to measure up. Especially when it’s important.
Especially when it’s easy to make “a valiant attempt at judgment.”
On Oct. 11, 2001, 156 congressmen and senators stood up for
decency and common sense. The others, who proved they were
too stupid and short-sighted to do the right thing when it
counted, should resign. They don’t deserve our votes, much
less a shot at the White House.
—Ted
Rall
|
Classifieds
