When Dissent Was Duty II
By Mike Hersh, Aug 5, 2005
I wrote this two years ago, but once again events require an update and reposting. As Bush's war of naked aggression against the people of Iraq morphs into an open-ended occupation, it makes sense to demand answers about the lies and failures that got us into this mess. Even more important, we must demand an exit strategy, what some members of Congress insisted US law and the Constitution require:
"[T]he president needs to tell Congress what the plans are." That's a fact, mandated by the War Powers Act, if not Article One of the US Constitution. "The administration's campaign has been a disaster. [It] escalated a guerrilla warfare [sic] into a real war, and the real losers are... innocent civilians." That's been clear from the start of the "Shock and Awe" bombings.
Furthermore, according to members of Congress, the attack "caused all of these problems to explode." The policy "was a mistake [and] this president ought to show some leadership and admit it [because it] is not helpful for the president's spin machine to be out there right now saying that [opposition] is weakening [when] nothing has changed." We're stuck in "a quagmire ... a long, protracted, bloody war."
Finally "[The] President is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy." But these aren't Congressional Democrats criticizing Bush. No, these are all quotes from Republicans attacking the Clinton response to the crisis in Kosovo and the violence in the Balkans, which was measured and infinitely less costly than Bush's illegal, immoral attack on and occupation of Iraq. Republicans are actually right about their criticisms, only they're wrong about their target. They should demand from Bush the same disclosure they got from Clinton and attack the Bush Administration's lack of diplomacy - and success, exit strategy, etc. I won't hold my breath.This is what I wrote during the long, lie-filled ramp up to war:
As Bush drags an unwilling world into an unnecessary, immoral war against Iraq his allies and supporters here in the US step up their efforts to crush dissent. Such that it is. The already servile mass media quivers in fear. Elected officials face bitter retribution if they speak out. Bush's bullies are even attacking the Dixie Chicks!
Last night I was disgusted to watch MSNBC's Joe "Scarface" Scarborough and
friends accuse Democrats of disloyalty and attack their patriotism for daring to
tell the truth about Bush, his rush to war, and his diplomatic failures. This
reminded me of an article I wrote a year ago which exposes right wingers'
"situational patriotism." These shameless chicken hawks and GOPocrites flip flop
on national security, putting partisan gain over America. Then they have the
audacity to project this on others. Shameful!
When the war on terror
began, W. Bush promised revenge. I mean justice. Well, he said it was justice
when he told us he wouldn't rest until he smoked out Osama bin Laden and brought
him back "Dead or Alive." Remember that? W. said he'd get bin Laden -- like the
old poster in Texas said - "Dead or Alive." Until then, we could not call the
war on terror a success.
Then-Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and
conservative Democratic Senator Robert Byrd said essentially the same thing:
that our success depends on catching bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leaders. They
also called for consultation between the Congress and the White House. Suddenly
top Republicans in and out of Congress went berserk. See: Democrats
Criticize Pentagon Budget, Anti-Terror War, Washington Post, 02/28/02:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14019-2002Feb27.html
"Disgusting!"
spat then-House Majority Whip, now Majority Leader Tom DeLay. DeLay has since
castigated Howard Dean, a leading Democratic Presidential candidate for daring
to disagree with an unelected presidential candidate, AWOL Bush. He's "giving
aid and comfort to our enemies!" accused Rep. Tom Davis of VA. "How dare Senator
Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism,"
screamed Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott.
Since Daschle lamented Bush's
utter failure and half-hearted efforts to disarm Saddam without bloodshed, the
Republicans brought out their sharp knives again.
police attacked our elected President Clinton.
Back then they insisted harsh dissent was duty.
Brendan Nyhan's Salon Magazine article "Bully Brigade" exposed what right wingers really think about our Constitutional rights and the system of checks and balances which the founders designed to protect us from tyranny and abuse. See: Bully Brigade, by Brendan Nyhan: Salon Magazine, 03/05/02. http://www.salon.com/politics/col/spinsanity/2002/03/05/dissent/index.html
Here are a few key quotes: Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott,
R-Miss. In a "Red Alert" press bulletin: "How dare Senator Daschle criticize
President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism, especially when we
have troops in the field?" Lott appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" program:
saying "any sign that we are losing that unity, or crack in that support, will
be, I think, used against us overseas." See: http://www.msnbc.com/news/718722.asp
Rep.
Tom Davis, R-VA.: Daschle's "divisive comments have the effect of giving aid and
comfort to our enemies by allowing them to exploit divisions in our country."
[Those are the elements of treason.] See: Quieting
the homefront, by Bryan Keefer: Salon Magazine, 03/01/02.
http://www.salon.com/politics/col/spinsanity/2002/03/01/lott/index.html
During
a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Attorney General John Ashcroft attacked
Bush critics' loyalty: "Your tactics only aid terrorists -- for they erode our
national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's
enemies and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of good will to
remain silent in the face of evil." See: Closing Down Debate:
Ashcroft's Attack on Dissent, by Bryan Keefer: Spinsanity, December 10,
2001, http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20011210.html
The times have changed
Saletan noted a profound GOP flip flop Not long ago, top Republicans considered attacking a President a duty, not a crime. Slate reporter William Saletan wrote an amazingly prescient column on May 7, 1999 called: "Yankee Go Home." Saletan observed that during past wars, Republicans claimed opponents of US military actions were "sabotaging American morale and aiding the enemy." Saletan noted a profound GOP flip flop as President Clinton intervened in Kosovo: "Republicans aren't bashing the anti-war movement. They're leading it." How the times, they are a changing. See: Yankee Go Home, by William Saletan: Slate Magazine, 03/07/99 http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=27730Saletan identified "three of the top five Republicans in Congress -- then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi, Senate Majority Whip Don Nickles of Oklahoma, and then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay of Texas -- [who] went on television to discuss the war." He summarized the Republicans' attacks on Clinton policies as follows:
1. The atrocities are America's fault. Nickles: "The administration's campaign has been a disaster. [It] escalated a guerrilla warfare [sic] into a real war, and the real losers are ... innocent civilians." DeLay also blamed his Commander in Chief: "Clinton's bombing campaign has caused all of these problems to explode."
2. The failure of diplomacy to avert the war is America's fault. Lott said "I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning … I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area." Nickles besmirched not only American, but also our allies blaming the conflict on NATO's peace proposal which he called "a very arrogant agreement [that] caused this thing to escalate."
3. Congress should not support the war. Lott and Nickles openly undermined the military when they voted against the NATO air campaign, along with 70 percent of Republicans in the Senate GOP. They led dissent and Nickles even ridiculed "NATO's objectives [as] ludicrous." DeLay supported legislation to overrule the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ordering the military "to remove U.S. Armed Forces."
4. We can't win. DeLay gave aid and comfort to war criminal Milosevic who he praised as "stronger in Kosovo now than he was before the bombing...." As this leading Republican continued, he sounded like Milosevic's press secretary: "The Serbian people are rallying around him like never before. He's much stronger with his allies, Russians and others."
DeLay criticized his wartime leader, President Clinton, claiming he "has no plan for the end [and] recognizes that Milosevic will still be in power." DeLay further undermined Clinton: "The bombing was a mistake.... [T]his president ought to show some leadership and admit it, and come to some sort of negotiated end."
5. Don't believe U.S. propaganda. Nickles said, "This war is not going well…. I heard Secretary Cohen say, 'Well, Milosevic miscalculated how, you know, steadfast we would be in the bombing campaign.' But frankly ... we grossly miscalculated what Milosevic's response would be." DeLay spun: "It is not helpful for the president's spin machine to be out there right now saying that Milosevic is weakening [when] nothing has changed."
6. Give peace a chance. DeLay called Clinton's refusal to meet with indicted war criminal Milosevic a "disappointing [failure of] leadership," and added, "The president ought to open up negotiations and come to some sort of diplomatic end." Lott told Clinton to "give peace a chance." [No, this is not a misprint!]
7. We have no choice but to compromise. Lott said unless the "bombing stopped [and NATO can] get Milosevic to pull back his troops" we faced "a quagmire ... a long, protracted, bloody war." DeLay said Clinton "only has two choices, [either to] occupy Yugoslavia and take Milosevic out [or] negotiate some sort of diplomatic end, diplomatic agreement in order to end this failed policy."
8. We're eager to compromise. Nickles demanded "a compromise." Lott endorsed Milosevic's position: "Surely there's wiggle room … I think something can be worked out."
9. We'll back off first. Nickles: "Secretary Cohen says, 'Well, Mr. Milosevic has to do all these things, then we'll stop the bombing.' [But], I strongly believe we need ... a stopping of the bombing...." Added Lott: "Let's see if we can't find a way to get the bombing stopped...." DeLay, referencing Reagan's blunder that killed to 240 marines: "When Ronald Reagan saw that he had made a mistake putting our soldiers in Lebanon. [Reagan] admitted the mistake, and he withdrew from Lebanon."
Set aside the horrendous inaccuracy and misguided predictions. As we know, Milosevic fell, in large part due to President Clinton's leadership. Forget the months of painstaking negotiations at Dayton and elsewhere led by Ambassador Richard C. Holbrook which bore fruit. Clearly these Republicans forgot all that, calling for the Clinton administration to do things they'd already done.
Can you imagine the uproar if a Democrat made any of these comments today about Bush's "war leadership?" I've tried, but I can't. Republican demagogues from the halls of Congress and talk radio waves attack questioning Bush as the equivalent of treason!
Can you imagine the outrage if a Democratic president was "leading" an effort which failed to turn up bin Laden while his friends and relations cashed in -- some might say profiteered? See: USA="Under Saudi Arabia" by Mike Hersh: American Politics Journal, 12/24/01 http://www.americanpolitics.com/20011224Hersh.html
The GOPocrisy is astounding, as Saletan reports: "Republicans [claim] they're serving their country by debunking and thwarting a bad policy administered by a bad president." He concluded: "You can be sure of only two things: Each party is arguing exactly the opposite of what it argued the last time a Republican president led the nation into war, and exactly the opposite of what it will argue next time."
I wish that were true. Scattered, mild Democratic comment on the war hasn't approached the criticism and attacks against President Clinton's decisions and Secretary Cohen's honesty quoted above. Democrats barely dare to ask for more information! I hope this changes soon, however, and I see signs that it might.
So, why all the rage and accusations of treason when Daschle paraphrased our feckless leader? Because Daschle repeated what Bush said not what Bush meant. Repeating what the bogus POTUS says is "treasonous" if he was lying when he said it. Daschle's crime wasn't calling Bush a liar; it was taking Bush at his word.
As the months pass into years, and we understand how Bush allowed top al Queda and Taliban leaders escape at Tora Bora, it seems clear Bush never really wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." Just after 9/11, Bush helped dozens of bin Laden's relatives flee the US -- including brothers Abdullah and Omar bin Laden whom the FBI suspected of helping Osama plot terrorist attacks. If Bush wanted to catch the bin Laden terrorists, why did he help them escape? It might make for an embarrassing meeting over at the Carlyle Group if a Saudi $billionaire yelled at Poppy Bush: "Your son killed my cousin Osama!" Daschle and the Democrats are demanding answers at enormous political risk. In return, the right wing accuses them of treason. The right wingers keep assaulting our freedom to speak and our right right to know. Where is our media? They should be asking questions and demanding answers. However, few dare to confront W. Bush as he carries on the Bush family tradition of squandering lives and covering it up with lies. See: Damn Daschle the Dissenter, by Mike Hersh: The Liberal Slant http://www.yourmailinglistprovider.com/pubarchive.php?haney+696
For once Lott was right: "I think the president needs to tell Congress what the plans are. There are a lot of unanswered questions here." Every Congress has a constitutional duty to demand answers from every White House -- especially one as reckless, corrupt, illegitimate, and inept as this one. Call it 9-11Gate by Mike Hersh: American Politics Journal, 05/17/02
http://www.americanpolitics.com/20020517Outrage3.html
As the Bush Administration bungles and sends thugs to stamp out dissent, people ask more, not fewer questions. We've learned the lessons of Vietnam and Beirut. This is America. We will not sit down, shut up, and let our troops fight and die in vain. Bush must answer our questions, or we will make him and his party answer for it -- at the polls in 2002 and 2004.
Republicans escaped accountability so far
But 2006 is
just around the corner....
"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter had to give up their life?" -Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99
"You can support the troops but not the president" -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
"[The] President is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy." -Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)
"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
-Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W. Bush
"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning. I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)
"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
-Joe Scarborough (R-FL)
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for Mission Creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing and there still is no plan today."
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
-Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)
"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."
-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)
"Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
The Clinton response to the crisis in Kosovo and the violence in the Balkans was more measured and infinitely less costly than Bush's illegal, immoral attack on and occupation of Iraq. Republicans are actually right about their criticisms, only they're wrong about their target. They should demand from Bush the same disclosure they got from Clinton and attack the Bush Administration's lack of diplomacy - and success, exit strategy, etc.
Main sources. Note: some may no longer work: Democrats Criticize Pentagon Budget, Anti-Terror War by Vernon Loeb and Bradley Graham: Washington Post, 02/28/02
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A14019-2002Feb27¬Found=true
CNN "Crossfire" transcript of show aired 03/04/02 http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0203/04/cf.00.html
Quieting the homefront, by Bryan Keefer: Salon Magazine, 03/01/02. http://www.salon.com/politics/col/spinsanity/2002/03/01/lott/index.html Bully Brigade, by Brendan Nyhan: Salon Magazine, 03/05/02 http://www.salon.com/politics/col/spinsanity/2002/03/05/dissent/index.html
Yankee Go Home, by William Saletan: Slate Magazine, 03/07/99 http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=27730
USA="Under Saudi Arabia" by Mike Hersh: American Politics Journal, 12/24/01 http://www.americanpolitics.com/20011224Hersh.html
Google Search: Milosevic war crime
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&q=Milosevic+%22war+crime%22&sa=N&tab=nw
Call it 9-11Gate by Mike Hersh: American Politics Journal, 05/17/02
http://www.americanpolitics.com/20020517Outrage3.html
© 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.