http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/22971What more does Congress Need to Impeach?
Submitted by davidswanson on Sun, 2007-05-27 00:28. Evidence | Impeachment
By Robert Fantina
snip//
•
• Mr. Bush and his administration were clearly warned of the dire consequences his invasion of Iraq could unleash. Each one listed above has come to pass; if the administration knew about them, why were not contingency plans made to deal with them? Congress must also ask this question.
•
• The U.S. rushed into war without providing American soldiers with the equipment they needed to protect themselves (we must not forget then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s callous comment when asked why soldiers had to sift through garbage dumps to find metal to protect their vehicles: “you have to go to war with the army you have, not the army you want.” This would be true if there had been a need to go to war, but not for a war of choice). Why were the soldiers not adequately protected? Why was there such a rush to invade that American lives were considered expendable?
•
• Prior to the invasion, then Secretary of State Colin Powell produced for the United Nations satellite photos that he claimed showed the presence of ‘active chemical munitions bunkers’ disguised from U.N. inspectors.’ Such bunkers did not exist. What was the source of Mr. Powell’s information?
•
• War is always to be considered only as a last resort. The fact that Mr. Bush’s evicted the U.N. weapons inspectors prior to the completion of their work, so he could quickly invade Iraq, demonstrates that not all avenues had been expended before war was waged. Had they been permitted to complete their work, war could have been averted. Why were they not allowed to finish?
•
What more evidence is required by the spineless Democratic-controlled Congress in order to cause its members to fulfill their Constitutional obligations? During the administration of President Clinton, Congress was rabid to proceed with impeachment over accusations pertaining to his personal life. Mr. Clinton was in fact impeached due to his alleged transgressions. Yet those transgressions caused no war, resulted in the deaths of no one, did not destabilize an already volatile part of the world, and did not tarnish the reputation of America in any significant way. The consequences of Mr. Bush’s lies are harrowing: the deaths of nearly 3,500 American soldiers, with that number increasing every day; hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths with no end of the carnage in sight; the displacement of at least two million Iraqis from their homes, and the trashing of America’s reputation worldwide. A recent worldwide survey indicated that, after Osama bin Laden, Mr. Bush is seen as the most dangerous person in the world.
The public spoke clearly in November of 2006, when it handed control of Congress to the Democrats for the first time in more than a decade. Apparently the Democrats were not listening. It is time again for the public to be heard, via letters, telephone calls, emails and marches. The atrocities of Mr. Bush’s regime must be stopped; Congress, supposedly beholden to no one but the citizens of America, has the power to do it.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
