posted on September 9, 2003 10:45:31 AM new
Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation
The Cross Hall
8:01 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: My fellow citizens, events in Iraq have now reached the final days of decision.
For more than a decade, the United States and other nations have pursued patient and honorable efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime without war. That regime pledged to reveal and destroy all its weapons of mass destruction as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War in 1991.
Since then, the world has engaged in 12 years of diplomacy. We have passed more than a dozen resolutions in the United Nations Security Council. We have sent hundreds of weapons inspectors to oversee the disarmament of Iraq. Our good faith has not been returned.
The Iraqi regime has used diplomacy as a ploy to gain time and advantage. It has uniformly defied Security Council resolutions demanding full disarmament. Over the years, U.N. weapon inspectors have been threatened by Iraqi officials, electronically bugged, and systematically deceived. Peaceful efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime have failed again and again -- because we are not dealing with peaceful men.
Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. This regime has already used weapons of mass destruction against Iraq's neighbors and against Iraq's people.
The regime has a history of reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a deep hatred of America and our friends. And it has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.
The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other.
The [b]United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat. But we will do everything to defeat it. Instead of drifting along toward tragedy, we will set a course toward safety.
Before the day of horror can come, before it is too late to act, this danger will be removed.
The United States of America has the sovereign authority to use force in assuring its own national security. That duty falls to me, as Commander-in-Chief, by the oath I have sworn, by the oath I will keep.
Recognizing the threat to our country, the United States Congress voted overwhelmingly last year to support the use of force against Iraq.
America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully. We believe in the mission of the United Nations. One reason the U.N. was founded after the second world war was to confront aggressive dictators, actively and early, before they can attack the innocent and destroy the peace.
In the case of Iraq, the Security Council did act, in the early 1990s. Under Resolutions 678 and 687 -- both still in effect -- the United States and our allies are authorized to use force in ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. This is not a question of authority, it is a question of will.
Last September, I went to the U.N. General Assembly and urged the nations of the world to unite and bring an end to this danger. On November 8th, the Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1441, finding Iraq in material breach of its obligations, and vowing serious consequences if Iraq did not fully and immediately disarm.
Today, no nation can possibly claim that Iraq has disarmed. And it will not disarm so long as Saddam Hussein holds power. For the last four-and-a-half months, the United States and our allies have worked within the Security Council to enforce that Council's long-standing demands. Yet, some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq.
These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it. Many nations, however, do have the resolve and fortitude to act against this threat to peace, and a broad coalition is now gathering to enforce the just demands of the world. The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours.
In recent days, some governments in the Middle East have been doing their part. They have delivered public and private messages urging the dictator to leave Iraq, so that disarmament can proceed peacefully. He has thus far refused. All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end. Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours.
Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. For their own safety, all foreign nationals -- including journalists and inspectors -- should leave Iraq immediately.
Many Iraqis can hear me tonight in a translated radio broadcast, and I have a message for them. If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you. As our coalition takes away their power, we will deliver the food and medicine you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free.
In a free Iraq, there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture chambers and rape rooms. The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near.
It is too late for Saddam Hussein to remain in power. It is not too late for the Iraqi military to act with honor and protect your country by permitting the peaceful entry of coalition forces to eliminate weapons of mass destruction. Our forces will give Iraqi military units clear instructions on actions they can take to avoid being attacked and destroyed. I urge every member of the Iraqi military and intelligence services, if war comes, do not fight for a dying regime that is not worth your own life.
And all Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this warning. In any conflict, your fate will depend on your action. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people. Do not obey any command to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone, including the Iraqi people. War crimes will be prosecuted. War criminals will be punished. And it will be no defense to say, "I was just following orders."
Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war, and every measure will be taken to win it. Americans understand the costs of conflict because we have paid them in the past. War has no certainty, except the certainty of sacrifice.
Yet, the only way to reduce the harm and duration of war is to apply the full force and might of our military, and we are prepared to do so. If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end. In desperation, he and terrorists groups might try to conduct terrorist operations against the American people and our friends.
These attacks are not inevitable. They are, however, possible. And this very fact underscores the reason we cannot live under the threat of blackmail. The terrorist threat to America and the world will be diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed.
Our government is on heightened watch against these dangers. Just as we are preparing to ensure victory in Iraq, we are taking further actions to protect our homeland. In recent days, American authorities have expelled from the country certain individuals with ties to Iraqi intelligence services. Among other measures, I have directed additional security of our airports, and increased Coast Guard patrols of major seaports. The Department of Homeland Security is working closely with the nation's governors to increase armed security at critical facilities across America.
Should enemies strike our country, they would be attempting to shift our attention with panic and weaken our morale with fear. In this, they would fail. No act of theirs can alter the course or shake the resolve of this country. We are a peaceful people --yet we're not a fragile people, and we will not be intimidated by thugs and killers. If our enemies dare to strike us, they and all who have aided them, will face fearful consequences.
We are now acting because the risks of inaction would be far greater. In one year, or five years, the power of Iraq to inflict harm on all free nations would be multiplied many times over. With these capabilities, Saddam Hussein and his terrorist allies could choose the moment of deadly conflict when they are strongest. We choose to meet that threat now, where it arises, before it can appear suddenly in our skies and cities.
The cause of peace requires all free nations to recognize new and undeniable realities. In the 20th century, some chose to appease murderous dictators, whose threats were allowed to grow into genocide and global war. In this century, when evil men plot chemical, biological and nuclear terror, a policy of appeasement could bring destruction of a kind never before seen on this earth.
Terrorists and terror states do not reveal these threats with fair notice, in formal declarations -- and responding to such enemies only after they have struck first is not self-defense, it is suicide. The security of the world requires disarming Saddam Hussein now.
As we enforce the just demands of the world, we will also honor the deepest commitments of our country. Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe the Iraqi people are deserving and capable of human liberty. And when the dictator has departed, they can set an example to all the Middle East of a vital and peaceful and self-governing nation.
The United States, with other countries, will work to advance liberty and peace in that region. Our goal will not be achieved overnight, but it can come over time. The power and appeal of human liberty is felt in every life and every land. And the greatest power of freedom is to overcome hatred and violence, and turn the creative gifts of men and women to the pursuits of peace.
That is the future we choose. Free nations have a duty to defend our people by uniting against the violent. And tonight, as we have done before, America and our allies accept that responsibility.
Good night, and may God continue to bless America.
As it becomes clear that the Iraq effort is a losing battle, George Bush now asks for $87 billion...25 times the budget of the CIA.
"Our strategy in Iraq will require new resources. We have conducted a thorough assessment of our military and reconstruction needs in Iraq, and also in Afghanistan. I will soon submit to Congress a request for $87 billion."
posted on September 9, 2003 11:09:10 AM new
And then we have President Clinton's speech only two years earlier. Still saying saddam has been given one last chance.
Text of President Clinton's speech
The full text of President Clinton's statement on military strikes launched against Iraq, Dec. 16, 1998:
Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.
I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.
Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.
The inspectors undertook this mission first 7 ½ years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.
The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.
The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM as Iraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion, we've had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down. Faced with Saddam's latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance.
Eight Arab nations - Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman - warned that Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the UN. When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It was only then at the last possible moment that Iraq backed down. It pledged to the UN that it had made, and I quote, a clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.
I decided then to call off the attack with our airplanes already in the air because Saddam had given in to our demands.
I concluded then that the right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove his willingness to cooperate.
I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.
Now over the past three weeks, the UN weapons inspectors have carried out their plan for testing Iraq's cooperation. The testing period ended this weekend, and last night, UNSCOM's chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results to UN Secretary-General Annan.
The conclusions are stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors. Here are some of the particulars.
Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party and said it will deny access to the party's other offices, even though UN resolutions make no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.
Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM's effort to photograph bombs related to its chemical weapons program.
It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.
Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment.
Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.
So Iraq has abused its final chance.
As the UNSCOM reports concludes, and again I quote, ''Iraq's conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in the fields of disarmament.
''In light of this experience, and in the absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must regrettably be recorded again that the commission is not able to conduct the work mandated to it by the Security Council with respect to Iraq's prohibited weapons program.''
In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham.
Saddam's deception has defeated their effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors.
This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance. And so we had to act and act now.
Let me explain why.
First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.
Second, if Saddam can crippled the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community - led by the United States - has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday - make no mistake - he will use it again as he has in the past.
Third, in halting our air strikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance, not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region.
That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team - including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser - I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.
They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.
At the same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay a heavy price. We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisers, a swift response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to prepare.
If we had delayed for even a matter of days from Chairman Butler's report, we would have given Saddam more time to disperse his forces and protect his weapons.
Also, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan begins this weekend. For us to initiate military action during Ramadan would be profoundly offensive to the Muslim world and, therefore, would damage our relations with Arab countries and the progress we have made in the Middle East.
That is something we wanted very much to avoid without giving Iraq a month's head start to prepare for potential action against it.
Finally, our allies, including Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain, concurred that now is the time to strike. I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now and comply with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. But we have to be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he poses. So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people.
First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens.
The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War.
Second, so long as Iraq remains out of compliance, we will work with the international community to maintain and enforce economic sanctions. Sanctions have cost Saddam more than $120 billion - resources that would have been used to rebuild his military.
The sanctions system allows Iraq to sell oil for food, for medicine, for other humanitarian supplies for the Iraqi people.
We have no quarrel with them. But without the sanctions, we would see the oil-for-food program become oil-for-tanks, resulting in a greater threat to Iraq's neighbors and less food for its people.
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world. The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government - a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently.
The decision to use force is never cost-free. Whenever American forces are placed in harm's way, we risk the loss of life. And while our strikes are focused on Iraq's military capabilities, there will be unintended Iraqi casualties.
Indeed, in the past, Saddam has intentionally placed Iraqi civilians in harm's way in a cynical bid to sway international opinion.
We must be prepared for these realities.
At the same time, Saddam should have absolutely no doubt if he lashes out at his neighbors, we will respond forcefully.
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.
And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.
Because we're acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future.
Let me close by addressing one other issue. Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down.
But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so.
In the century we're leaving, America has often made the difference between chaos and community, fear and hope. Now, in the new century, we'll have a remarkable opportunity to shape a future more peaceful than the past, but only if we stand strong against the enemies of peace.
Tonight, the United States is doing just that. May God bless and protect the brave men and women who are carrying out this vital mission and their families. And may God bless America.
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 9, 2003 11:19 AM ]
posted on September 9, 2003 11:11:25 AM new
How to Beat W's War Record
"Mr. Bush led the country through the horrific days after September 11 with remarkable strength and resolve. He drove the Taliban and much of al Qaeda from Afghanistan. He organized a worldwide effort to cut off funds to terrorist organizations and capture terrorist leaders. And he won the war in Iraq - even if he has not yet totally secured the peace there. The only way the Democrats can beat this record is by convincing the American people that: (a) it didn't happen; (b) if it did happen, Mr. Bush had nothing to do with it; or (c) it shouldn't have happened in the first place."
- Columnist Linda Chavez
Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34
posted on September 9, 2003 11:18:06 AM new Linda, are you trying to hide my comments with reams of text. That's a cowardly way to respond.
Again, As it becomes clear that the Iraq effort is a losing battle, George Bush now asks for $87 billion...25 times the budget of the CIA.
"Our strategy in Iraq will require new resources. We have conducted a thorough assessment of our military and reconstruction needs in Iraq, and also in Afghanistan. I will soon submit to Congress a request for $87 billion." bush
The Tax break for the wealthy will not be affected...of course. And Halliburton will be pleased too.
Bush's proposal received mixed reception from both Democrats and Republicans.
But it was clear that the administration's request for far more money than was envisioned not long ago was not going to sail through Congress. Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts and a committee member, said he would offer an amendment to the Iraq spending bill that would bar money for relief and reconstruction until the president officially reports to Congress on his Iraq strategy.
"Before the Congress writes a blank check to the administration, we need to know what the broader plan is," Mr. Kennedy said in remarks prepared for the hearing.
posted on September 9, 2003 11:29:06 AM new
bear - Linda Chavez has that right. That's exactly what's going on.
As it becomes clear that the Iraq effort is a losing battle, George Bush now asks for $87 billion...25 times the budget of the CIA.
Go back into our history helen, and see what this nation spent on Japan and Europe after WWII.
"Our strategy in Iraq will require new resources. We have conducted a thorough assessment of our military and reconstruction needs in Iraq, and also in Afghanistan. I will soon submit to Congress a request for $87 billion."
Yes, and as I have mentioned before....you were once griping that we weren't doing enough to rebuild Afghanistan....now you're complaining because $15B is going to be spent doing exactly what you wanted us to do in the first place. There is just no pleasing you helen. lol
posted on September 9, 2003 12:12:18 PM newThe taliban has returned to Afghanistan. Are you and Bear unaware of that too?
Well...I certainly can't speak for bear, but from what I've read the taliban has been ordering the terrorist to go fight [read defend the saddam loyalists] in Iraq.
Do you think, just maybe, that's why the President is also asking for such large sums of money for Afghanistan?
Sure looks to me like our President is not going to allow the continue influx of terrorists, from all over, to win this war.
Now, if the far left democrats would rather see us fail there, that's their problem. But I have faith the majority of our Congress will not make this a policital decision, but rather a decision about what's in our country's best interest.
I personally wouldn't at all be surprise if someone in our Congress suggests the President might need much more than this amount to do what is necessary.
posted on September 9, 2003 12:28:33 PM new
No helen, I was showing that things weren't as bad as you continue to post here. Your negative thoughts are always this is a losing battle. I don't agree. I think now that we're seeing more outsiders coming in to support the old saddam regime, we need to pick the pace up a little bit. More troops [which Blair is sending in], maybe more help from the UN....but our military aren't presently calling for more troops. Matter of fact, they've been saying the have enough troops, they just need more money to get the Iraqi people trained to take care of some of their own countries business. And I support that being done.
It's going to take a while....Ms Negativity, but I have no doubt the US is going to come out the winner in this.
But I am glad to hear you laughed at least once today. Good for those facial muscles. All that build up anger uses the wrong facial muscles and ages one too quickly.
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 9, 2003 12:31 PM ]
posted on September 9, 2003 12:37:28 PM new
The fact that terrorists are taking advantage of our failure to maintain peace in Iraq is ,of course, evidence of U.S. failure. This war is a hellish disaster. To call our mess a global war on terrorism is ludicrous.
First, Bush left the impression that 9/11 was related to Saddam Hussein and now he is linking the mess in Iraq with GLOBAL terrorism.
posted on September 9, 2003 12:47:58 PM new
There has been no failure because this isn't over yet. Do you run away when things get rough in your life? I don't. When things aren't going the way you might like them to, one needs to do a re-evaluation and go forward from there. You just deal with the new problems as they present themselves. You don't throw your hands up in the air and say "I've failed".
I keep bringing up the example of what the US did after WWII to show you that it was not accomplished without large outlays of funding, time and continued efforts. I'm sure there were those then, like yourself, who continued to say the US was wasting it's time and money on that project too. But it turned out they were wrong. And will be proved to be wrong again.
posted on September 9, 2003 01:03:30 PM new
Instead of dwelling on the few pockets where we are still facing challenges you might want to review 100 positive changes that have taken place in Iraq during just the first 100 days that saddam is was no longer in control.
These present a much different picture than all these 'doom and gloom' posts do.
Here are just ten, so you don't have to click on the link if you just can't face seeing anything positive coming out of this situation for the Iraqi people.
10 Signs of Cultural Rebirth
Iraqi Olympic Committee is reconstituted without fear from Uday Hussein: The new President of the Free Iraq Olympic group said, "The Iraqi teams used to produce the champions of Asia in many sports. They have declined since the arrival of Uday. Now we want to rebuild them with the help of the international community." -- Sharar Haydar, one of Uday Hussein's former torture victims, The Guardian (London), May 15, 2003.
The Baghdad symphony is performing, and their concerts are also being televised. The conductor of the symphony said, "We're trying to show the world that Iraqis have a great culture." -- Hisham Sharaf, at a performance of the Baghdad Symphony, Agence France Presse, June 12, 2003.
Theaters are quickly reopening. In the words of one filmmaker: "You cannot imagine what it means for us to be here on this national stage, where everything we stand for was forbidden. Now it is ours."-- Oday Rashid, Los Angeles Times, May 5, 2003.
Religious rites are being reestablished. As one Iraqi said: "I can't express my feelings. All I feel is joy. This is the first time I've seen this (Shiite celebrations) for 30 years. Saddam forbade everything. He forced us underground." -- Sami Abbas, a Shia at the holy shrine of Kadhimiy, The Washington Post, April 16, 2003.
150 newspapers on the streets of Baghdad help get out the news of a free Iraq. Ali Jabar is quoted as saying, "Every day I buy a different paper. I like them all." Says a newspaper editor: "We can't train staff fast enough. People are desperate here for a neutral free press after 30 years of a totalitarian state." -- Saad al-Bazzaz, editor of the Azzaman Daily in Baghdad, The Independent (London), July 8, 2003.
Satellite dishes are the most popular items for sale in Baghdad. "I want to watch all of the world, all channels in the world. I want to watch freedom." -- Mohammed al-Khayat, an Iraqi who just purchased his first satellite dish, The Baltimore Sun, April 26, 2003.
Banned books are now available in the market. A teacher selling books in Baghdad said: "Before, so many books were forbidden -- anything that didn't agree with the regime. Which means practically everything that was ever printed!" -- Imad Saad, Los Angeles Times, May 3, 2003.
Artists are free to display their works and poets are free to write. As one poet said: "For decades, we were used to watching ourselves. Now you can think with words. But to talk loudly and to think loudly takes time. Freedom needs practice, and it takes practice to be free." -- Mohammed Thamer, The Washington Post, April 22, 2003.
Education is being revitalized. As a member of Baghdad's city council pointed out, "We want to have a real education, to be a progressive country. Education is very important to the reconstruction of our society. If you want to civilize society, you must care about education." -- Al Sa'ad Majid al Musowi, The Chicago Tribune, July 31, 2003.
The Marshlands are being rehabilitated. In the words of one Iraqi, "We broke the dams when the Iraqi army left. We want to teach our children how to fish, how to move on the water again." -- Qasim Shalgan Lafta, a former fisherman who helped restore the water to the Iraqi wetlands that Saddam had destroyed, The Chicago Tribune, June 13, 2003.
Many wonderful changes are going on over there. Maybe you just need to focus on some of the positives rather than only all the problem areas. Might give you a better sense of 'balance'.
posted on September 9, 2003 01:17:20 PM new
I've seen troops interviewed on the streets of Baghdad. Their story is significantly less positive than yours.
posted on September 9, 2003 03:47:32 PM new
Linda, I guess we, the enlightened realists have forgotten that the new terrorist in America are the lip-erals that think they are in the right.
Especially when you consider the Nine Stooges vieing for the demo pres bis....
Freaks and Oddballs
"Have you ever seen such a sad collection of electoral oddballs, fringe political freaks and quasi-criminal losers in your life? This is the kind of campaign disaster that challenges one's commitment to the democratic process itself. It's scary to think that one of these knuckleheads gets to win. California? Who said anything about California? I'm talking about the Democrats' presidential primary."
- Columnist Michael Graham, Columbia Free Time, 9/3/03
Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34
posted on September 9, 2003 06:35:49 PM new
Helen - Well maybe it's just that you're reading the wrong sources.
Try this one. It is one of several I've read and contains positive reports on what's changing in Iraq.
[i]Reconstructing Iraq
With the Marines in the south and the 101st Airborne in the north[/i].
by Max Boot
[i]09/15/2003, Volume 009, Issue 01[i]
A personal account:
I WENT TO IRAQ in August, the day after a bomb had ripped through the United Nations compound in Baghdad, killing 23 people including the U.N. special envoy. I came home the day after another massive car bomb exploded at a mosque in Najaf, taking more than 95 lives including that of a leading cleric. Yet I returned more optimistic than when I went.
Understandably, these attacks have caused apprehension, verging on panic, among U.S.-based commentators and politicians. A chorus of critics is already attacking the Bush administration for losing Iraq. During my trip I, too, saw plenty of room for improvement, especially by the civilian-run Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad.
For that matter, I was almost a casualty of a roadside bomb myself. Nevertheless, after 10 days traveling with soldiers and Marines in both the north and south, I am encouraged by the resourcefulness of our troops and struck by how different things look when seen firsthand. From afar, chaos seems to reign in Iraq; up close, distinct signs of progress emerge.
We're only four months into the reconstruction. There are problems but there are positive things coming about also.
------
I know bear, between the gloom-and-doom-club and the Angry Left, it's a good thing our President has strong convictions.
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 9, 2003 06:43 PM ]
posted on September 9, 2003 07:42:11 PM new
Perhaps Linda is telling the truth.
I just got this e-mail from someone claiming to be a friend of hers.
Apparently the following image of a smiley face, which came to me accompanied with an affidavit, is being done by a happy and liberated little Iraqi girl.
“I hereby forthwith declare that, is good to be live in Iraq now, under the auspices of the greatest freedom lover on earth”
signed,
Liberty Mahmood Yoosef
All that build up anger uses the wrong facial muscles and ages one too quickly.
