posted on May 14, 2004 05:53:33 AM new
Wise words, imo, found in the Editorial section of this mornings Wall Street Journal.....from a moderate democrat who can see what's at stake for our nation.
-----------------
Let Us Have Faith'
Why Rumsfeld must stay.
BY JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN
Friday, May 14, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT WASHINGTON--
Watching the reels of pictures from the prison in Iraq was a jarring descent into a world without values or limits or law. I was appalled, of course, by the American guards' lack of any respect for the humanity of their prisoners. But I was also struck and saddened by their lack of respect, as seen in the pictures they took of themselves, for their own humanity, for their own inherent human dignity.
How could these deeds have been done by soldiers wearing the uniform of this country, which has always proudly defined itself by the values in our Declaration of Independence--that every man and woman is endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights, the very rights we are in Iraq to make real for the Iraqi people?
What caused these heinous acts? Was it just the latest example of the reality history reveals, that some soldiers crack under the stress of war? Was it the human weakness of guards exploiting the temporary power they hold over those in their control? Was it directed, encouraged, facilitated or tolerated by higher-ups in the chain of command?
Was it somehow also the cumulative effect on a generation raised in an entertainment and Internet culture that has grown increasingly violent and pornographic?
I do not know enough yet to answer these important questions with sufficient confidence. They must be asked and answered. But I do know enough to reach the following conclusions:
First, we must aggressively and thoroughly investigate what was happening at Abu Ghraib prison and at every other American military prison. We must hold accountable anyone who was responsible for wrongdoing, which requires that we undertake the most independent and unfettered investigation possible. I have high hopes for the special investigative group composed of former defense secretaries James Schlesinger and Harold Brown, congresswoman Tillie Fowler, and general Charles Horner, which seems to have been given appropriately broad and independent authority, and the capacity to hire its own staff.
This investigation, and the justice it produces, should make clear to us and the world that we Americans will not tolerate such inhumanity, even in the treatment of those who are themselves wantonly inhumane to us.
The beheading of Nick Berg just because he was an American made painfully clear how little our enemies value life. Prison abuse must not blur the enormous moral differences between us and those we fight in Iraq, and in the world-wide war on terrorism.
And that leads to my second conclusion. We cannot allow the prison scandal in Iraq to diminish our own American sense of national honor and purpose, or further erode support for our just and necessary cause in Iraq.
American opponents of the war may try to do the latter, while foreign critics and enemies of the United States will try to do the former. The misdeeds of a few do not alter the character of our nation or the honor of the many who serve in our defense--and the world's--every day. Winning the war we are now fighting in Iraq against Saddam loyalists and jihadist terrorists remains critical to the security of the American people, the freedom of the Iraqi people, and the hopes of all the Middle East for stability and peace.
Most Democrats and Republicans, including President Bush and Sen. Kerry, agree that we must successfully finish what we have started in Iraq. Now is the time for all who share that goal to make our agreement publicly clear, to stress what unites us. Many argue that we can only rectify the wrongs done in the Iraqi prisons if Donald Rumsfeld resigns. I disagree. Unless there is clear evidence connecting him to the wrongdoing, it is neither sensible nor fair to force the resignation of the secretary of defense, who clearly retains the confidence of the commander in chief, in the midst of a war. I have yet to see such evidence.
Secretary Rumsfeld's removal would delight foreign and domestic opponents of America's presence in Iraq.
But, as we are showing in our response to Abu Ghraib, we are a nation of laws, and therefore must punish only those who are proven guilty. The Iraqi prison scandal has been a nightmare at an already difficult moment in the war in Iraq. But our cause remains as critical as ever to our security and our values. We must therefore persist in it.
With determination and confidence, we should recall President Lincoln's words at another difficult moment in American history in pursuit of another just cause: "Let us have faith that right makes might; and in that faith let us do our duty as we understand it."
Mr. Lieberman is a Democratic senator from Connecticut.
posted on May 14, 2004 11:07:43 AM new"Most Democrats and Republicans, including President Bush and Sen. Kerry, agree that we must successfully finish what we have started in Iraq."
Another double-edged sword. Of course the U.S. needs to finish what they started. Problem is, they haven't accomplished anything other than finding Hussein, so what's there to finish? If Afghanistan is an example of finishing, then how are the Iraqi's suppose to feel?
posted on May 14, 2004 12:43:48 PM new
Maybe I missed something Near. Last I heard, Afghanistan was in further decay with the Taliban still in charge. Their biggest means of income was from the opium trade which is now being monitored by the U.S. as a mini drug war. Why, have you heard differently?
posted on May 14, 2004 12:54:20 PM new
Yeah, they were making more sites for the election, and something like 2 million have registered, 30% being women
They have a President now, his name is Musharraf.
They still have the warlords
They have opium growers and we're fighing a 'mini drug war' so what are you saying, they should be allowed to do it?
__________________________________ In cyberspace, you can't hear a liberal scream.
posted on May 14, 2004 01:12:01 PM new
What right does the U.S. have to tell the Afghanistan people they can't grow poppies? Just because the U.S. is against drugs doesn't mean all other countries should be too. Are these fields being replaced with another cash crop for the Afghani farmers?
posted on May 14, 2004 01:13:25 PM new
Afghanistan has been somewhat ignored since the US put the main focus on Iraq. The biggest problem is that there is no security so it makes it very difficult for even Aid workers to help out there. They are now investigating reports of prison abuse in Afghanistan too.
When the US went into Afghanistan once again they failed to learn about or respect other cultures, this time the Pashtun one so it's hindered their progress somewhat.
This was written about in one of the links that Helen posted awhile ago. It was the National Geographic website....... you know, another one of those terrible "leftie" sites that she keeps being accused of linking to.
posted on May 14, 2004 01:41:09 PM new
KAREZEQ, Afghanistan (AP) - The bulb of the little pink flower reaches deep into Afghan society, sowing problems with the country's allies, financing gunmen and even bringing addiction to ordinary Afghans.
In Afghanistan, opium is everywhere. The United Nations says the burgeoning poppy crop produced three-quarters of the world's illicit opium last year, worth $3.2 billion Cdn and accounting for half Afghanistan's gross domestic product. Output was 20 times more than in 2001, the last year of rule by the strict Taliban regime.
Returning from a recent conference with donor countries, President Hamid Karzai called on Afghans to wage a "jihad," or holy war, on the drug trade.
It was a politically risky move. Poppy farming supports thousands of families and is a major source of income for many powerful warlords.
On a recent day, a counter-narcotics team in Kandahar province fanned out across farms, flanked by a dozen bodyguards armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades.
In the town of Karezeq, farmers confronted the team at the edge of fields pink with blooming poppies.
An elderly farmer begged for an officer to "be a good Muslim" and leave his crops alone. The response was quick: "It's the opium that you grow that's un-Islamic."
Eventually, they compromised: One-third of the plants would be uprooted. The farmers glumly watched as tractors tore up the earth.
Karzai's government says the goal is not to destroy farmers' livelihoods, but to encourage planting legal crops. While wheat and corn are nowhere near as profitable, at least the farmers know those crops will get to market, officials say.
The vast majority of the poppy crop is exported to meet the demand for drugs in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, but some stay at home, feeding a growing addiction problem.
posted on May 14, 2004 03:59:51 PM new
Hello All, In my opinion republicans like Linda_K are now grasping at straws. They are so desperate to find any little good thing that someone says about the failed republican leadership. Having said that I have to agree with Linda_K, Geo Bush has not failed 100% its more like he has only failed like 90%. We all must remember that under G. Bush the rich and greedy corporations are doing very well.
ebayauctionvet, You seem to have forgotten Joe Lieberman doesn't need a job. Mr. Lieberman is already a high ranking Democratic Senator.
posted on May 14, 2004 06:32:53 PM newTwisted Facts and Falsehoods in Media Fund Ad
Democratic group's ad claims Bush turned White House into "corporate headquarters," but backs that up with false claims.
05.14.2004
Summary
The latest ad from the Media Fund -- the group headed by former Clinton White House aide Harold Ickes -- shows the White House lawn being given over to corporate logos and a neon sign saying "Corporate Headquarters."
There's no question Bush is pro-business, but this ad goes far over the line on several counts. It implies Bush hasn't acted to protect pensions, fight corporate corruption or provide a "real" prescription drug benefit for retirees, all of which are false.
It also implies he personally awarded a contract to Halliburton, which is also false.
Analysis
It's hard to cram this much distortion into a mere 30 seconds, but Ickes' group is up to the task.
----------------------
Media Fund ad
"Corporate Headquarters"
Announcer: Instead of protecting pensions, George Bush supported a bill giving Enron huge new tax breaks.
Instead of giving seniors real prescription drug benefits, Bush gave drug companies billions in his Medicare bill.
Instead of fighting corporate corruption, George Bush gave no-bid contracts to Halliburton - a company caught overcharging for fuel and food for our soldiers in Iraq.
------------------------
Not Protecting Pensions?
The ad says Bush supported tax breaks for Enron "instead of protecting pensions."
That's wrong.
Bush has taken action to protect pensions, signing legislation in 2002 that made some technical changes to address weaknesses in 401(k) practices that Enron employees blamed for losses in their retirement accounts.
Bush also supports additional legislation to allow employees who get company stock as a retirement benefit to sell it and diversify their investments, and to require companies to offer investment advice to employees from independent outsiders.
As for the claim that Bush supported "giving Enron huge new tax breaks," it's true that Bush supported repeal of the corporate alternative minimum tax in 2002 as part of an economic stimulus package, and that Enron led a group of corporations pushing for repeal. But the really big breaks for Enron were not proposed by Bush; they were added by Republican House Ways and Means chairman Bill Thomas, who proposed letting corporations redeem AMT credits built up over many years. That would have given $254 million to Enron, and also would have aided several other large corporations. But the whole bill died when the Senate refused to consider it.
posted on May 14, 2004 10:18:20 PM newNot Protecting Pensions?
No that's right. The Enron issue was a diversification issue and does not address the underfunding of pensions. In fact Bush has proposed lower standards for funding pensions. Ask all the 70 year old steel workers who have lost their health insurance and a large portion of their pension how important the "diversification" allowance is. Diversification means nothing for defined benefit pensioners.
But the whole bill died when the Senate refused to consider it.
So. It still means Bush is for this issue. And if he would be re-elected he would have the political capital to force this bill through Congress.
posted on May 14, 2004 10:20:37 PM new
Lieberman is also fearful that if or when we leave Iraq and a democracy doesn't materialize, Israel is back at square one in the regional peace process.
