Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Bush Administration is a threat to our Republic and National Security

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 12:33 PM
Original message
The Bush Administration is a threat to our Republic and National Security
But, hey, don't take my word for it.

Here is Ambassador Wilson in interview:

This is a radical regime, not a Republican administration. It is the most oppressive crowd I have ever seen and is a real threat to our republic. While I am not an expert in elections I can see how people might believe the last two elections were stolen. The lesson for the democrats is to stop rolling over and stand up for what you believe in. The republicans believe the democrats and the press are soft and can be pushed around and that is what they are doing. To the detriment of us all.


The man who I believe won the election of 2000 but was never installed as the President of the United States, Al Gore, said much the same thing on May 26, 2004, when he called for the resignation of much of the Bush administration:

President Bush said in his speech Monday night that the war in Iraq is "the central front in the war on terror." It's not the central front in the war on terror, but it has unfortunately become the central recruiting office for terrorists. The unpleasant truth is that President Bush's utter incompetence has made the world a far more dangerous place and dramatically increased the threat of terrorism against the United States. Just yesterday, the International Institute of Strategic Studies reported that the Iraq conflict " has arguable focused the energies and resources of Al Qaeda and its followers while diluting those of the global counterterrorism coalition." The ISS said that in the wake of the war in Iraq Al Qaeda now has more than 18,000 potential terrorists scattered around the world and the war in Iraq is swelling its ranks.

The war plan was incompetent in its rejection of the advice from military professionals and the analysis of the intelligence was incompetent in its conclusion that our soldiers would be welcomed with garlands of flowers and cheering crowds. Thus we would not need to respect the so-called Powell doctrine of overwhelming force.

There was also in Rumsfeld's planning a failure to provide security for nuclear materials, and to prevent widespread lawlessness and looting.

Luckily, there was a high level of competence on the part of our soldiers even though they were denied the tools and the numbers they needed for their mission. What a disgrace that their families have to hold bake sales to buy discarded Kevlar vests to stuff into the floorboards of the Humvees! Bake sales for body armor.

And the worst still lies ahead. General Joseph Hoar, the former head of the Marine Corps, said "I believe we are absolutely on the brink of failure. We are looking into the abyss."

When a senior, respected military leader like Joe Hoar uses the word "abyss", then the rest of us damn well better listen. Here is what he means: more American soldiers dying, Iraq slipping into worse chaos and violence, no end in sight, with our influence and moral authority seriously damaged.

Retired Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni, who headed Central Command before becoming President Bush's personal emissary to the Middle East, said recently that our nation's current course is "headed over Niagara Falls."

The Commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, Army Major General Charles H. Swannack, Jr., asked by the Washington Post whether he believes the United States is losing the war in Iraq, replied, "I think strategically, we are." Army Colonel Paul Hughes, who directed strategic planning for the US occupation authority in Baghdad, compared what he sees in Iraq to the Vietnam War, in which he lost his brother: "I promised myself when I came on active duty that I would do everything in my power to prevent that ... from happening again. " Noting that Vietnam featured a pattern of winning battles while losing the war, Hughes added "unless we ensure that we have coherence in our policy, we will lose strategically."

The White House spokesman, Dan Bartlett was asked on live television about these scathing condemnations by Generals involved in the highest levels of Pentagon planning and he replied, "Well they're retired, and we take our advice from active duty officers."

But amazingly, even active duty military officers are speaking out against President Bush. For example, the Washington Post quoted an unnamed senior General at the Pentagon as saying, " the current OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) refused to listen or adhere to military advice." Rarely if ever in American history have uniformed commanders felt compelled to challenge their commander in chief in public.

The Post also quoted an unnamed general as saying, "Like a lot of senior Army guys I'm quite angry" with Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush Administration. He listed two reasons. "I think they are going to break the Army," he said, adding that what really incites him is "I don't think they care."

/snip/

It is therefore essential that even as we focus on the fateful choice, the voters must make this November that we simultaneously search for ways to sharply reduce the extraordinary danger that we face with the current leadership team in place. It is for that reason that I am calling today for Republicans as well as Democrats to join me in asking for the immediate resignations of those immediately below George Bush and Dick Cheney who are most responsible for creating the catastrophe that we are facing in Iraq.

We desperately need a national security team with at least minimal competence because the current team is making things worse with each passing day. They are endangering the lives of our soldiers, and sharply increasing the danger faced by American citizens everywhere in the world, including here at home. They are enraging hundreds of millions of people and embittering an entire generation of anti-Americans whose rage is already near the boiling point.

We simply cannot afford to further increase the risk to our country with more blunders by this team. Donald Rumsfeld, as the chief architect of the war plan, should resign today. His deputies Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and his intelligence chief Stephen Cambone should also resign. The nation is especially at risk every single day that Rumsfeld remains as Secretary of Defense.

Condoleeza Rice, who has badly mishandled the coordination of national security policy, should also resign immediately.


Obviously they didn't. Worse, in November 2004 once again the American people ostensibly had an opportunity to select new and better governance. That opportunity failed. Now we are where we are.

Asked if Bush is likely to be impeached, Ambassador Wilson said,

It is unlikely that Republican-held Houses of Congress are going to open an inquiry unless they suddenly decide their Constitutional oversight responsibilities trump their partisan loyalties. I am not holding my breath.


So, where does that leave WE THE PEOPLE? Our national security is in jeopardy and we, apparently, have no recourse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yes, of course it is.
Well, we can do what we can. Before Nixon's fall, many thought that there would be no recourse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 12:47 PM
Original message
But this is much bigger than Watergate -- much bigger.
The implications here directly affect our national security. That is, the safety and welfare of us all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. It leaves us at 2006
If we take back the House, there will be hearings. At that point, there won't be enough rocks for all of the vermin to hide under. I guess the Senate would do, instead, but impeachment hearings have to start in the House.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Do you trust the electoral process? I don't.
I wish I could, but I don't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatever4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. The conspiracy theorists
might say, and I might be one of them, that being in a frightened weakened state, is exactly how they want us. As with Hitler, he's taken over "legally", and we have no recourse.

Where does that leave us? I don't really know. No where good. We've already got quite a few people in prison, so hopefully the continued destruction of our lives will consist of prison, labor and slavery over extermination. But it's not a given. What to do about it? NO idea. I cannot fathom how so many people fell for this in the first place, trusting anything that looked like Bush. No clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Hey, he gets it. Wilson in '08? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. He'd get my vote!
But would it count as I intended?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 24th 2014, 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC