Dean's Right: Getting Saddam No Panacea

[Larkspur]

by John Nichols
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1218-01.htm

Howard Dean showed a good measure of insight with regard to international affairs and security issues - and an even greater measure of political courage - when the man who is often portrayed as the front-runner in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination declared amid all the hoopla about the detention of Iraq's former dictator that "the capture of Saddam Hussein has not made America safer."

If the debate about the U.S. invasion of Iraq were being conducted along lines of fact or logic, of course, Dean's comment would be a simple statement of reality. Even before the U.S. attack on Iraq, there was no evidence that Saddam posed any immediate threat to the United States. Years of United Nations inspections, strict sanctions and bombings had rendered him a toothless tiger. And his militant secularism meant that it was comic to suggest Saddam had linked up with the religious extremists who lead the al-Qaida terrorist network.
<SNIP>

I love the last paragraph...
It is shameful that other candidates who want to carry the Democratic brief into that debate would attack Dean for speaking the truth about what is going on in Iraq. Lieberman, in particular, has proven that he is not prepared to mount a credible or realistic challenge to the president. Indeed, his comments suggest that a Lieberman presidency would not depart in any serious manner from the foreign policy agenda of the Bush administration.

To his credit, Howard Dean wants to make that departure. That is why so many more Americans are excited by his candidacy than by Lieberman's.

[rucky]

1. To anybody who says America is safer,

I would ask why we're not trying him in the US.

[WiseMen]

12. I was just a not called for comment that Dean is using to Get Attention.

Can raise media and money like that. Can't govern an empire with
these Bush-Like stunts and blunders.

There was simply no point in making that comment, rather than just
praising the troops for some measure of success.

[mzmolly]

2. How can one oppose the war and say *but now it's a good thing?*

It's amazing to me really.

[Hep]

3. And exactly what is the argument

for saying we're safer because we pulled an old guy out of a hole?

[BurtWorm]

4. Gorsh! I made almost exactly the same statement in a DU thread.

Does Nichols read DU? Should I sue? ;)

[jumptheshadow]

5. Dean is correct

We've killed how many people and wasted how many billions of dollars on capturing a guy who could have been effectively contained using international diplomacy and organizations.

In the meantime, we are letting Afghanistan distintegrate and have lost our focus on Al Qaeda.

[tedoll78]

16. YUP!

We had the tiger in a cage. He was boxed-in. With a thousand microscopes over him. Saddam would've had to ask permission to wipe his @ss.. we so had him under our control.

[caledesi]

6. SH was not involved in 9/11 nor had he done anything to us, so

why are we safer because he got "captured?" Makes no sense, but then again this is *.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. Each time he dares to speak the truth the DLC types cringe

in terror that "the media" might not like it and start wailing that "Dean's too liberal!".

No surprise that the Fearful Four are attacking the statement in justification of their support for Emperor CowBooties.

[Scott Lee]

11. And it's a cringe I savor

Seeing that the DLC these days are useless as tits on a boar.

[DFLforever]

8. And this why Dean is the most formidable contender

in the Democratic field and the one who actually will have the best chance of knocking off George W.

[Julien Sorel]

9. I wasn't aware of anyone who said it was a panacea.

I think whoever said that deserves to be put in a corner with a dunce cap on. :eyes:

[Myra]

10. This should have been the least controversial thing Dean ever said.

It's so obviously true that 'Merka's no safer now;
I don't know how anyone can even pretend to criticize
the remark with a straight face.

[sandnsea]

13. Nobody said it would be

Safer doesn't mean safe in any dictionary in the world. Again, people's words have been spun all out of proportion to protect Dean's stupidity.

"Let’s be clear: Our problems in Iraq have not been caused by one man – and simply capturing Saddam Hussein does not finally and fully clear the path to a peaceful and democratic outcome."

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1216.html

[Julien Sorel]

14. Dean's right: chewing on glass *is* bad for your health.

Dean's right: The sun does rise in the East.

Dean's right: The sky is blue.

Dean's right: Playing with matches can be dangerous.

Dean's right: A stitch in time does save nine.

Dean's right: and so on.

[SahaleArm]

15. LOL n/t

[robbedvoter]

17. Clark's right:resistance not run by a pathetic ex-dictator hiding ina hole

speech given at NATO the same day - not covered - and as usual, the *D Rodeo drive publicity stunt gets the sole attention:
On Clark's stands
"The entire resistance in Iraq was not run by a pathetic ex-dictator hiding in a hole," the retired general told a foreign-policy crowd in The Hague this week. His solution in Iraq is no different from his rivals: getting help from American allies. But his pitch is all the more compelling because of his experience in Kosovo.
"We won the war, in no small measure because Belgrade could not break the will of 19 democracies united in common cause," Clark said. "I believe alliances are indispensable, not inconvenient," he continued. "I would rather have capable European forces with a say in making decisions, than to have Tonga and the Marshall Islands with no strings attached."
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3762367/
Entire speech:
http://clark04.com/speeches/020/

[sandnsea]

18. Iraq's problems not caused by one man

They're all saying the same thing, except Howard. He's the only one that says it doesn't matter one way or the other whether Saddam was captured. Clark isn't saying that, if you read the rest of his statement.

"Capturing Saddam increases our chances for success. If we succeed in Iraq, America will be safer. If we fail in Iraq, our enemies will be emboldened."
http://clark04.com/speeches/021/

Kerry's statement:

"Let’s be clear: Our problems in Iraq have not been caused by one man – and simply capturing Saddam Hussein does not finally and fully clear the path to a peaceful and democratic outcome. This is a moment of opportunity, a turning point when the Administration can and should face the realities of how you gain international support in this effort. We cannot expect other nations to join us now if the Administration prohibits them from sharing the reconstruction because they opposed us previously. That not only defies common sense – it’s childish retribution which puts our troops at greater risk. It’s time we leave no doubt what we believe: Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people, not Halliburton and Bechtel."
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1216.html