Reply #7: 2+3=5 [View All]

[DrFunkenstein]

Kerry voted to give Bush the authority to hold a proverbial/literal gun to Saddam's head and say that we will not take you screwing around with UNMOVIC like you did with UNSCOM. We are going to put inspectors on the ground, and give them every chance they need to show that you are in compliance with the resolutions you, yourself, had signed.

Kerry said that Saddam did not pose an imminent threat, but that he posed a long-term threat, given 3 things: 1) his history of major WMD use on urban populations, 2) his proven desire to acquire nuclear weapons, 3) his record of great miscalculation. Saddam had a history as a loose cannon, and after 9/11 we weren't going to tolerate any more loose cannons.

Kerry said that talk of invasion, regime change, and even human rights abuses confused the issue and gave Saddam, amazingly, the moral high ground.

What Kerry did not sign up for was Bush's mind-numbing incompetence at every stage of the game. Bush rushed to war when it was clearly unnecessary, and he had not taken the time to build proper alliances and plan for victory. In fact, the Pentagon was given charge of the endeavor, and they systematically ignored the project the State Department had spent millions on to plan for winning the peace. That's the before.

The during. Rumsfeld incompetently built a doctrine around the "blitzkrieg" theory of warfare - small and fast. This thinned supply lines and provided inadequate artillery support for ground forces. More importantly, it left forces unable to contend with the inevitable chaos of a power vacuum and failed to secure the suspected WMD sites, including a nuclear facility. It was over a month before a significant US inspection team was assembled, which probably explains why o WMDs were found - they were probably taken in that period.

The after. Bush tried to play Scrooge with the Iraqis. Enormous pressure would have been taken off if Bush paid upfront to restore basic infrastructure, maintain hospitals, and fed the Iraqis copious amounts of food - thus making us the "good guys." Secondly, Bush refused to allow the UN to come in and take his war booty. This would have given the occupation legitimacy, just as ceding some power over to the interim government would have.

Kerry was right to forcibly demand Iraq's compliance. But although Bush clearly had a thing for Saddam, there was no way of knowing that he could have screwed things up so desperately. This was an avoidable war, a poorly-run war, and a catastrophic post-war scenario.

Although the vote was ultimately a no-win proposition, I have every confidence that Kerry would have done the right thing every step of the way. I also believe he has the most comprehensive and forward-thinking plan for fighting terrorism and generally making the world a better place to live.