|
Posted By:
Dauric
on
Monday, May 12, 2008
Barone and Feith are making the same mistake, they both claim that the "Liberals" are making the weapon stockpiles an issue. Oh how short a memory you have, it was the NeoCon administration that made weapon stockpiles the issue, the central issue, sent Powell to the U.N. with a presentation about mobile WMD labs. Twelve infamous words about Yellowcake in the State of the Union Address.
It's not only the Democrats and other "Liberals" that are concerned with the fact that the central reason, as stated by our administration, for invading Iraq was a fallacy. I'm a Republican, a Fiscal Conservative, who has seen our nation expend Blood and Treasure, borrow trillions from other nations (Like China who has completed an underground submarine base to house Ballistic Missile Subs) to support a war effort that has failed to come up with the stated reason that we engaged in this (mis-)adventure.
The troops and material that we have used in Iraq is akin to an investment. Before we make that investment, the ones who want to spend the money and resources on that investment need to produce an investment prospectus. A reason to spend the money, a rationale to take on the risks, a plan for managing the debt.
If your prospectus says that the investment will result in computerized alarm widgets that sell for $xx.xx and will return $XXX,XXX,XXX.xx over the lifetime of the investment, then you fail to make the widgets but instead claim to increase the fuzzy puppy and rainbow population (in a manner subject to interpretation and cannot be definitively proven), you've failed to deliver on the contract for the investors, and have committed fraud.
The administration's prospectus for the investment in Iraq said that WMDs from Iraq were a CLEAR and PRESENT danger to the security of the United States. When no WMDs were discovered (So their existance was not clear, nor was it present) the administration changed their tune to "Regime Change" and "Creating a Democracy in the Middle East".
You want to go in to Iraq to change the regime, fine, say so up front, make the case to the public that that is a worthwhile investment of blood and treasure. Changing your prospectus from "Remove Immediate Threat" to "Interfere with Foreign Powers" without going back to the investors (The American Public) is Fraud.
Oh, and that Chinese Submarine base... The one no doubt that will be paid for with interest from U.S. Treasury bonds: The Chinese claim that they need it to secure free shipping lanes and to fight piracy.
A Nuclear Ballistic Submarine like the one stationed at Jianggezhuang is not an Anti-Ship weapon, Attack Subs are.
Underground bases are not necessary to prevent attacks from common shipping raiders. Underground bases, like Cheyenne Mountain in the U.S., exist to prevent nuclear first strikes from hitting whatever is housed in them.
So Russia is escalating it's Anti-American/Anti-West rhetoric with a former KGB agent assuming a puppeteer role as Prime Minister behind a weak "President", while China produces underground bases to protect a first-strike nuclear weapon and blatantly lying about it's function. Meanwhile we are burning trillions of dollars, accumulating debt that will go to finance nations who are building weapons that have few legitimate targets, and our nation is one of them.
Ahhh, THERE'S the WMDs...
As a fiscal conservative, a taxpayer in good standing, and a citizen of the United States of America I have to wonder of anyone's even remotely awake in the District of Columbia.
$0.02.
|
