I don’t oppose all wars.
I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man.
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
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.
We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly.
Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.
I SUBMIT THAT THE ABOVE STATEMENTS WERE NOT NAIVE. DO I HAVE ANY ARGUMENT?
HOW ABOUT STATEMENTS BEING MADE BY GW BUSH, CHENEY,RUMSFELD, McCAIN, HILLARY,EDWARDS,KERRY ?
WERE THEY NAIVE?