Friday, August 17, 2007

NEXT POST
Cheney 1994 Argues Against Going Into Baghdad. Bush Said, "Bring It On!" Cheney '94: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire C-SPAN copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org For some, the recent revelation, that in 1994 Dick Cheney argued against going into Baghdad, suggests the now Vice President is in command. People posit, after years of criticism for not finishing the job in Iraq, the former Secretary of Defense Cheney felt a need to right his wrong. Perhaps, this powerful proxy Commander-In-Chief saw an opportunity to finish a job. Many submit the Vice President thought September 11, 2001 offered him a chance to correct his earlier error. Those that think this theory apt point to a 2005 interview published in The New Yorker Magazine. The words of an old friend General Brent Scowcroft help to substantiate that speculation. However, I have another premise to pose. George W. Bush may be a miracle worker. This man dubbed "W" may have the power to persuade a nation and a man that once made a rational request for a reasoned response, the 'imitable' Dick Cheney. I acknowledge what many think reasonable. During the days of the first Persian Gulf War Brent Scowcroft, a retired Air Force General, and advisor to the father, George Herbert Walker Bush, was markedly hawkish on the Iraq question. Scowcroft thought military action against Iraq was a must. The General advocated for an attack more so than the Secretary of State, James A. Baker III, and perhaps even more so than the then Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney. Scowcroft believed that if Saddam Hussein’s aggression against his neighbor nations was not addressed it would undermine the international rule of law. General Brent Scowcroft stated if America *allowed* the Iraqi leader to invade Kuwait the United States would appear weak. The war began on January 16, 1991. An air campaign that lasted five...
PREVIOUS POST
Impeachment; Bush and Cheney Convict of Constitutional Crimes copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org The question is often posed. Each day a few Progressives ponder the possibility and offer their plea. Conservatives on the "Right" and "Left' languish when they discuss what may be apt. They state there is no time. Some posit, impeachment will distract a nation at war. Ah, how the White House welcomes that theory. Many dismiss the notion. They question the feasibility. Others are ready, willing, and waiting to start the impeachment proceedings. Rants, rage, reasons fill the air; they flood the airwaves. Cyberspace is clogged with conversations. Congress declares the topic is "off the table." Yet, here it is. Few have stated the rational so concisely. I present the position for impeachment as detailed by the Voice of the Environment. I invite a discussion. Voice of the Environment's August 9, 2007 advertisement appeared in the San Francisco Bay Guardian, Santa Monica Mirror and New York Times. America Betrayed (#23 in a series of 30) Let’s put Bush & Cheney where they belong . . . Step One: Impeachment We the people have the legal right and the moral obligation to enforce the Constitution and the rule of law. If we allow George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to subvert and break the law, we ourselves become complicit in the illegality. The Case for Impeachment George W. Bush and Dick Cheney lied to Congress and to the American people in fabricating a case for an illegal, “preemptive” war against Iraq. They lied about Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction and they tricked the American people into believing that Saddam was responsible for the tragedies of 9/11. Bush and Cheney have subverted the Constitution through illegal surveillance of American citizens and the suspension of habeas corpus, a legal right dating back to the...

A being that believes . . . "thinking is the best way to travel!" [Mike Pinder, Moody Blues]

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments