Bush's Fatal Rush to War Against Iraq

Bush Based His Illegal, Immoral War on Lies and Deception
Read more articles about Bush's Rush to War at MikeHersh.com / Iraq

Bush signed a "resolution" of little substance and dubious constitutional validity. Bush lacked legal authority to declare war on Iraq or any other nation. Article I of the US Constitution reserves that authority exclusively for the Congress, which cannot delegate that power to any other elected or unelected official. To gain passage of the war resolution, Bush swore he'd rely on our allies and the United Nations, and that he'd exhaust all diplomatic means to neutralize the threat from Saddam Hussein before using military force. Bush violated all of these promises.

Bush's invasion of Iraq broke faith with the American public and violated Article I of the U.S. Constitution. He knowingly deceived us about the nature and scope of the highly exaggerated - if not entirely dubious - threat posed by Iraq. He misled us by predicating this elective war on the "War on Terror" and the 9/11 attacks.

Bush violated a legally binding promise to Congress outlined in the war resolution - upon which Bush predicated the war. Congress should impeach and remove Bush from office for his illegal, unconstitutional and increasingly disastrous actions regarding Iraq.

We've been working hour after hour, day after day, and 100,000s of people have read our articles. Still, we haven't seen the support we need to reach the voters. Please join with us. Contribute now to help us inform the American people and others around the world about Iraq and other critically important issues.

We tried to stave off the invasion of Iraq and the ensuing war which killed 100s of Americans in uniform and 10,000s of innocent Iraqis. We rely on your support. Contribute whatever you can to keep us going and growing.

The Gore Doctrine on Iraq - Today, Bush signed a "resolution" of little substance and dubious constitutional validity. Bush lacks legal authority to declare war on Iraq or any other nation. Article I of the US Constitution reserves that authority exclusively for the Congress, which cannot delegate that power to any other elected or unelected official. If Bush attacks Iraq, and thereby violates his promise to rely on the United Nations and other diplomatic means to neutralize the real but highly exaggerated threat from Saddam Hussein, Bush should be impeached for violating Article I of the Constitution. Clearly then, this is not the end to the debate on Iraq. Rather it is just a pause. Oct 16, 2002.

Bush vs. America - Mike Hersh offers his response to Bush's Rose Garden address Wednesday, October 2 concerning Iraq. Bush was unclear and insincere. Bush said, "Our country values life and never seeks war unless it is essential to security and to justice." This is true of America, but not true of Bush. Oct 3, 2002.

Chicken Hawks Hall of Shame - By "Symbolman" -- all rights reserved. You have to watch this. It should be run during Crossfire and all the Sunday gabshows. It's tremendous. It's accurate. It's funny and frightening at the same time. Oct 1, 2002.

Write! Call! Senators Listen (Pt 1) - Paul Sarbanes, my United States Senator responded to email I sent him. "Dear Mr. Hersh: Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about possible United States military action against Iraq. I appreciate your bringing to my attention information regarding this matter." Sep 30, 2002.

Write! Call! Senators Listen (Pt 2) - Paul Sarbanes, my United States Senator responded to email I sent him. "Dear Mr. Hersh ... I want to share with you my misgivings about undertaking a unilateral offensive against Iraq, independent of allies and partners or without consent from the Congress." Sep 30, 2002.

Unlimited War? - Eli Pariser of MoveOn.org writes: "Our nation is moving quickly toward a war with Iraq. Within the next ten days, Congress will likely vote on a resolution permitting President Bush to use military power against Iraq." Also, "The President has made clear that once it has passed, he'll proceed without further consultation with Congress." MoveOn asks you to "Please call your Senators and Representative right now to avert a carte blanche for catastrophe." Tell Congress to resist Bush's rush to war. Sep 29, 2002.

Stop Generalissimo W - Robert A. Dushay, Ph.D. writes: The cartoonist Ted Rall caricatures George W. Bush as a generalissimo, in a uniform bedecked with medals. I can't think of a more appropriate image for the man in the White House who claims the USA reserves the right to invade anybody, any time, with no evidence.... I cannot imagine the US letting any other nation adopt the same policy. Sep 28, 2002.

Iraq and the War On Terrorism - Albert Gore, Jr. -- President Elect of the United States -- addressed the issue of Iraq. He refuted the Bush Occupation's claims, and questioned their motivations for pressing this issue in this way at this time. Most importantly, the man most Americans voted for in 2000 presented a cogent, credible and sensible approach to Iraq. Most Americans favor Gore's approach, which would advance our efforts against terrorism and bolster our national security. Gore proved Bush's rash, unthinking approach would undermine both. Sep 28, 2002.

100th Anniversary - Mike Hersh writes: Congratulations to you, the readers of this website! Thanks to those who have already supported us and helped keep us on the web, we've posted 100 articles, so this is an anniversary of sorts. We are getting the word out about Bush's plans to attack Iraq, and other critical issues. Thanks to everyone for reading our articles. Now you can help us do much more.... Sep 28, 2002.

Celebrate the Victory of Diplomacy - Mike Hersh writes: U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said, "I can confirm to you that I have received a letter from the Iraqi authorities conveying its decision to allow the return of inspectors without conditions to continue their work." There is no longer any pretext for a military attack on Iraq. US policies have already achieved every legitimate, logical objective in this matter. Bluntly, any further attempts by the Bush administration to foment warfare would confirm lack of good faith and ulterior motivations. Sep 16, 2002.

Going Through The Motions Toward Destruction - Mary MacElveen writes: When "We The People" Lost Our Government. After the attacks that befell our once great nation on September 11th, many within our supposed government championed the spirit of patriotism. I am sorry to say, that our country's patriotism died on December 12, 2000, when every elected leader no matter which party their affiliation, allowed an unconstitutional act to be thrust upon the citizens of this country. Sep 13, 2002.

Iraq: "Merely a first step?" - Carla Binion writes: The Bush administration war hawks have for many years planned to reshape the Middle East. Iraq is merely a first step. Oil and domination of the region are primary concerns, not any "threat" from Saddam Hussein. Some of the hawks claim they want to create "democracy" in the region, but they have lied about that concern in the past. Sep 11, 2002.

Sadly Our Efforts to Prevent War Failed
All We Can Do Now Is Hold the Guilty Accountable
Use the links below to contact elected officials and the media

We all know the "wag the dog scenario." It's no secret Republicans are in big trouble as the November elections come closer. We don't believe the Bush administration would create a war for partisan politics, but his top man Karl Rove did admit that is their best issue. We consider questions of war and peace nonpartisan matters. Luckily top Senators on both sides of the aisle agree.

Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware is known as a straight shooter. He took off after Bill Clinton many times, and Sunday July 28, he was on the talks shows saying it would be "irresponsible" if Bush led us into war for political reasons. He added that Bush hasn't explained what we would do after we depose Saddam. Republicans like Sens. Lugar of Indiana and Hagel of Nebraska also question this impending invasion.

July 29, USA Today reported "many congressional leaders - including those who support the use of force against Saddam - worry that the administration needs a clearer justification than the belief that Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction." According to the USA Today, Biden says Bush has "no Constitutional authority to invade," and he hopes the Bush people have the "resolve" to do the right thing.

As it stands now, we'd be going it alone. Our allies are not with us on an invasion. Jordan's King Abdullah II calls plans to invade Iraq at this time "ludicrous" and even our #1 ally England isn't with us on this. Most of all, it's not necessary to invade. We won the Cold War without attacking the USSR, so containment works. We already have total air control over Iraq, and we've got them locked up economically.

Most people agree Bush's father pulled back because he didn't want to commit us to 10 years of military occupation or more. If Iraq has poison gas and bio-weapons, and we can find out where they are and destroy them without letting Saddam use them, we should do that.

We don't want to even think about how many American troops would die in an invasion. That's not even counting casualties during any occupation afterward, and all the innocent Iraqis killed. Then there's all the money this will take. Bush I had raise taxes to pay for Desert Storm, and that was just to drive Saddam out of Kuwait. Even so, that Bush left office with a $290 billion deficit! Bush II will have to raise taxes even more and roll up an even bigger deficit to get Saddam out of Iraq.

According to former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, Iraq is not now a threat to the United States. Weapons inspections can prevent Iraq from becoming a threat. Ritter, a former Marine intelligence officer wrote a book, Endgame, "Solving the Iraq Problem -- Once and for All." Even if we have no choice but to attack someday, inspectors would help determine the best course of action. But Bush is leading us headlong into an war. See: RED ALERT: October War in Iraq.

The bottom line is this: invasion isn't called for at this time. Containment is working. It worked against the USSR, and it will work against Iraq. We don't have to invade to ensure our safety. We have better, safer, less dangerous alternatives. We can and should demand resumption of weapons inspections and we can always invade if the circumstances warrant. They certainly do not warrant a costly, bloody unprovoked attack by the US. That's why we say "Inspect Iraq, Don't Attack."

Demand that Congress reopen hearings and debate on Iraq. Contact the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by telephone at 202-224-4651, or by fax at 202-228-1612. Faxes should include your name, address and phone number. We've gotten reports of problems with the Committee fax machine. Please keep trying until you get through.

Call the Chairman of the Committee: Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE): 202-224-5042. Call Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) considered the most receptive Committee member: D.C. office: 202-224-3553 -- L.A. office: 213-894-5000 -- S.F. office: 415-403-0100. Contact members of the Senate Subcommittee on Near Eastern Affairs

It will take continued efforts to convince Congress. They must heed expert advice on Iraq that will save lives. Keep calling and writing. Keep the pressure on. Send email to Congress and the media using the "write to Congress" link below - it works for both. Tell all of them we don't want to spill American blood in an unnecessary, costly war.

Demand to inspect Iraq, not attack.

 

Contact Congress Switchboard: (202) 224-3121 Send Email: House  Senate

Contact The White House Switchboard: (202) 456-1414. Send Email: White House

Thanks to Lisa Thomas for web-design.
(c) Mike Hersh 2002, 2003, 2004