When you're right, you're right
Who said this in 2002?
Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the middle east, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.
Answer: Barack Obama.
Hillary's going to have a tough time defending her war vote on grounds of "being misled" when her leading opponent, with admirable clarity, understood the problems with extended occupation.
Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the middle east, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.
Answer: Barack Obama.
Hillary's going to have a tough time defending her war vote on grounds of "being misled" when her leading opponent, with admirable clarity, understood the problems with extended occupation.
posted by Ben at 5:03 PM
5 Comments:
Barak Osama Hussein nailed it. I'm impressed.
Me too, PLUS, he writes very well. If he wrote that, that is, and I bet he did. ~momther
His "Toward a New Hope" book, or whatever its called, is poorly written, however. I couldn't get past the first two chapters.
well... maybe he doesn't write so well. Then he has a great speechwriter he should keep at all costs. I have a great speechwriter myself, luckily. ~m
Great quote. Thanks.
Post a Comment
<< Home