It's a Staple of American Politics: Republicans are "Strong on
Defense."
The Problem is, It's Simply Not true. Republicans Can't Keep Us
Safe.
Republican inability to run the economy is well established in other articles at the
MikeHersh.com site, but their failure to conduct diplomacy and national
security policy is less widely understood. The facts show Republicans are every
bit as bad at defense as they are at economics.
Republicans often accuse
Democrats of "decimating" defense and claim competence in matters military. The
facts expose this as simply inaccurate. When it comes to keeping America safe,
Republicans are absurdly overrated.
President Clinton Led Against Terrorism.
Reagan
Bush and Bush Failed to Protect Us.
Republicans tend to "go it
alone" and cause more problems than they solve. W. Bush is no exception to that
rule. Rather than address terrorism - or any other pressing national security
concern - the Bush Occupation focused exclusively on the $trillion-wasting,
scientifically unfeasible and strategically unnecessary "Star Wars" missile
shield. This catastrophic miscalculation is typical of Republican failure.
Reagan sent weapons to Iran and Iraq and empowered terrorists. This got more
than 500 Americans killed by Islamic terrorists. When we lost 241 marines in
Beirut, Reagan and cut and ran. Then he attacked tiny Grenada. Reagan threatened
to bomb the USSR in "a joke" and actually bombed Libya for bombing a night club
in Germany, something Syria did, which provoked a counter-attack on the Pan Am
flight downed over Scotland.
Although his fans claim Reagan won the Cold War, no matter how many times
they repeat it, that remains utter nonsense. We're fortunate Reagan's doddering
extremism didn't cause World War III. See: The Real Reagan
Legacy: http://www.americanpolitics.com/20020319Hersh.html
President Clinton dedicated himself to neutralizing bin Laden, but
Republicans in the Congress thwarted his efforts. Still, the Democrats didn't
stop trying to keep Americans safe from terror. The Clinton Administration
warned the Taliban America what would happen to them if Osama bin Laden attacked
us.
The Washington Post reports Clinton's counterterrorism coordinator threatened
the Taliban in an official communication: "If bin Laden or any of the
organizations affiliated with him attacks the United States or United States
interests we will hold you, the leadership of the Taliban, personally
accountable.'" See: Clinton's War
on Terror: The Covert Hunt for bin Laden, Washington Post, Dec. 19, 2001;
Page A01: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62776-2001Dec18?
Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and Two
Generations of Bushes
Failed Us
Upon taking the presidency, George H. W. Bush continued and expanded illegal,
illogical arms deals with Iraq. Bush I and Cheney as his Secretary of Defense
lied under oath to Congress in official documents and sworn testimony. They lied
about the types of equipment sent to Iraq and also violated restrictions on
trade with terrorist states and on the type of "dual use" equipment - useful for
civilian and military - sent to Iraq. This foolish policy cost taxpayers
$billions and blew up in our faces when Saddam attacked Kuwait. See: The Gulf
War, Frontline/BBC transcript 1, January 20, 1996:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf/script_a.html
If this were
an isolated failure, Republicans might stake some claim to marginal competence.
However, time and again Republicans missed or misunderstood Saddam's, al Qaeda's
and our other enemies' moves. See: Republicans
Can't Keep Us Safe - http://www.mikehersh.com/Republicans_Cant_Keep_Us_Safe.shtml
Somalia
was a Bush operation and just another Republican military failure, like Reagan
sending the marines to Beirut and doing nothing against terrorists who killed
more than 500 Americans. The first Bush sent the American forces into Somalia
without the proper support. He dropped the mess into Clinton's lap when the new
administration took over. If Clinton had sent our forces to Somalia, "Black Hawk
Down" would have been Clinton's fault. But despite reflexive Republican efforts
to blame Clinton for everything, Bush I is at fault for those brave troops we
saw dragged through Mogadishu.
Bush II is even worse than Reagan or his
father, leaving us open to attack on 9/11 and then sending our troops into harms
way in Iraq on the basis of wrong "intelligence" and lies to serve as glorified
rent-a-cops for Halliburton. Bush and the GOP have tried to slash Veterans
Administration funding, which was beaten back by concerted efforts by the brave
VFW members.
Bush's choice for Homeland Security Director, Tom Ridge tried to cut back on
Air Marshals - an open invitation to a repeat of the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks.
And worst of all Bush's horrendous failures left us vulnerable on that awful
day. Despite Republican efforts to blame Clinton, Bush let 9/11 happen.
Bush has no excuse for these gross failures. President Clinton increased
anti-terror spending by 1000%, and he froze al Qaeda assets. Clinton's law
enforcement team rounded up, tried and convicted the first World Trade Center
bombers, and gathered information to protect us against other attacks -
thwarting the millennium bombers and other attackers.
The Clinton
military bombed al Qaeda training camps - barely missing Osama bin Laden.
Clinton deployed two Los Angeles attack subs to watch over the Taliban and he
intimidated them into keeping al Qaeda on a tight leash. It worked.
The
Clinton team prepared a battle plan to attack al Qaeda in Afghanistan, but
didn't complete it in time to finish the operation before Bush would take
office. So Clinton had his staff - led by Sandy Berger - brief the Bush team,
trusting them to keep Americans safe by eliminating the al Qaeda threat. This
was the worst mistake in Clinton's life.
Clinton administration
officials including National Security Advisor Sandy Berger and Clinton's
Anti-terrorism "Czar" Richard Clarke impressed upon Bush's national security
team that al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden were mortal threats to American lives.
Unfortunately, those warnings went unheeded.
According to Time Magazine: "Long before the tragic events of September 11th,
the White House debated taking the fight to al-Qaeda. It didn't happen and soon
it was too late." Clarke, a veteran of the first Bush administration began
working on "an aggressive plan to take the fight to al-Qaeda" and he prepared "a
strategy paper" he presented to Berger and other Clinton national security
officials on December 20, 2000. However by then it was too late to implement a
major invasion against Osama bin Laden.
Time quotes a former senior Clinton aide saying "We would be handing (the
Bush Administration) a war when they took office on January 20, 2001. That
wasn't going to happen." Berger told incoming National Security Advisor Rice,
"I'm coming to this briefing to underscore how important I think this subject
is." Berger added "The Bush Administration will spend more time on terrorism
generally, and on al-Qaeda specifically, than any other subject.'" Unfortunately
Rice paid so little attention to these critical warnings, at first she said she
didn't recall even meeting with Berger!
Time reports that Berger was not present at the meeting when Clarke explained
the plan to "senior officials from both the Clinton and Bush administrations
[who] say that Clarke had a set of proposals to 'roll back' al-Qaeda. In fact,
the heading on Slide 14 of the Powerpoint presentation reads, 'Response to al
Qaeda: Roll back.'" There's more:
Clarke's proposals called for the 'breakup' of al-Qaeda cells and the arrest
of their personnel. The financial support for its terrorist activities would be
systematically attacked, its assets frozen, its funding from fake charities
stopped. Nations where al-Qaeda was causing trouble-Uzbekistan, the Philippines,
Yemen-would be given aid to fight the terrorists. Most important, Clarke wanted
to see a dramatic increase in covert action in Afghanistan to 'eliminate the
sanctuary' where al-Qaeda had its terrorist training camps and bin Laden was
being protected by the radical Islamic Taliban regime.
See: "Could 9/11 Have Been Prevented?" MICHAEL ELLIOTT, Time Magazine, Aug.
04, 2002: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,333835,00.html#
The Bush administration kept Clarke on as a top anti-terrorist advisor. In a
side-bar report, Time notes: "January 25, 2001, Clarke presents a plan to his
new bosses urging an aggressive five-point program to take the fight to
al-Qaeda, calling for air attacks on all training camps in Afghanistan," which
the Bush team ignored.
"On May 8, 2001, Bush create[d] a new Office of National Preparedness for
terrorism and promises a government review, led by Dick Cheney, into the
consequences of a domestic attack. It never happens." In fact, Cheney failed to
call a meeting for preparedness against terror in time to prevent the 9/11
attacks.
According to Time, on "July 5, 2001, Despite a quiet Fourth of July, the CIA
warns Bush that imminent strikes are still possible. He asks Rice to find out
what the agencies are doing about al-Qaeda. Clarke holds meetings with CIA, FBI,
Pentagon and State officials. He also tells key domestic agencies to be prepared
for an attack." They ignore him.
This although Bush and top Bush officials were warned about possible
hijacking terror attacks on "July 10, 2001, Phoenix, Ariz., FBI agent Kenneth
Williams sends headquarters a memo about Middle Eastern students at an Arizona
flight school, theorizing al-Qaeda could be trying to infiltrate U.S. aviation
[and CIA Director] Tenet brief[ed] Bush in Crawford, Texas, with an analytic
report on al-Qaeda. It is based largely on old intelligence but raises
hijackings as a possible threat," on August 6, 2001.
As al Qaeda prepared for the massive attacks, Bush and his top officials
didn't. Bush ignored the threats and took a long vacation. As Time reports,
"September 4, 2001, The Principals' Committee - Cheney, Rice and other top
national-security officials - [finally held] its first terrorism meeting. They
debate[d] Clarke's plan, decide[d] to implement it in a phased approach and send
it to Bush." Of course by then it was too late. The Bush Administration's
tentative, impotent moves came months late and $millions short.
Time reports, "September 9, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld threaten[ed] to urge a veto
if the Senate proceeds with a plan to divert $600 million from missile defense
to counter-terrorism." That threat, mere hours before the fateful day, expresses
Bush Defense and National Security priorities in a nutshell: $Billions for "Star
Wars" to protect us from the defunct USSR, nothing to protect us against the
real threat - terrorism.
See "Timeline: Blown Chances," Time Magazine, Aug. 04, 2002:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,333835,00.html
For months - from the time they took office in January to September on the
very eve of destruction - the Bush administration ignored critically important
evidence and advice. They disregarded Clarke, Berger, the Hart-Rudman
anti-terrorism commission, the Gore airline safety findings, the FBI, the CIA,
our allies and other warnings. They obsessed on "Star Wars," tax cuts, and
helping Enron and other big contributors write national energy policy while
ignoring the known, growing threat from terrorism.
Bush refused to use
the battle plan, and ignored all the warnings. He halted FBI and CIA
investigations of bin Laden's terror network in the US. Bush pulled back the
attack subs and reached out to the Taliban. Then he went on vacation. Our
enemies saw Bush's weakness and attacked, killing 3,100 Americans.
Sure the Clinton military did well in battle in Afghanistan and Iraq,
performing beyond all expectations, but Bush is attacking the wrong people in
the wrong places. Bush eliminated bin Laden's secular enemy Saddam in Iraq and
this only helps terrorism flourish. See: Bush
is doing what bin Laden wants.
Of course the Clinton military deserves our support, but Bush and the
Republicans refuse to back our troops. The Bush Defense Department can't even
treat our troops with dignity or respect. While Bush's blunders keep getting
them in harms way and 100s are hurt and killed, the Republicans try to cut their
combat pay and the Veterans' Administration budget. Only a heated effort by the
Veterans of Foreign Wars staved off that Bush back-stab. See: Who Supports Our
Troops? Updated - http://www.mikehersh.com/Who_supports_our_troops.shtml.
It gets even worse. Bush's DoD is making troops pay for their body armor and
even for their food while they're recovering in the hospital. Incredibly some of
our troops in battle zones haven't even been paid in months.
Toppling Cheney and Rumsfeld's old business partner Saddam is all well and
good, but to what end? Bush and company never had a plan for the post-war phase
and they are misleading us in the aftermath even as they misled us into
war.
Once more, Republicans are failing to lead on military matters.
Removing Saddam's regime without making any provision for the aftermath let al
Qaeda's radical Islamic allies rise up in Iraq. Bush made it much easier for al
Qaeda to recruit and kill Americans the well over 100,000 American troops and
bogged down in Iraq. Bush also squandered $billions we need to protect our
bridges, atomic power plants, dams, and more.
"Bush's Brain" Karl Rove
claims Americans count on Republicans to protect us. Rove is dead wrong. His
claims fly in the face of reality. As shown by their long unbroken string of
indefensible unmitigated ineptitude, Republicans do not know what they're doing
regarding national security, defense or diplomacy. In short, Republicans still
can't keep us safe.
© Copyright 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 by MikeHersh.com
and identified authors. MikeHersh.com invites you to broadcast
any material at this site, provided you identify the source as
MikeHersh.com. All print, Internet, email and other summaries, excerpts
or other written reproductions must
include this blurb and a link to http://www.MikeHersh.com.