Las Vegas Sun

November 23, 2014

Currently: 56° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Letter to the editor:

Columnist went easy on Cheney

Another view?

View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:

Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.

Columnists - local and syndicated writers.

Letters to the editor - readers' views.

Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.

Maureen Dowd’s comments in her column “Repent, Dick Cheney” are overdue — though too easy, not only on the former vice president but also on former President George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.

The mentioned “gentlemen,” who in their youth diligently avoided combat in Vietnam but urged thousands of others to fight and, if necessary, die for the biggest scam ever, meticulously planned and brought to fruition the second Iraq war.

The U.S. “won” but accomplished nothing but death and the maiming of Americans and Iraqis whose numbers are incalculable.

A congressional medal of horror ought to be bestowed on that triumvirate of chicken hawks.

It is commendable that Dick Cheney has no regrets. Neither did Saddam Hussein.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 58 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. There were many mistakes made during the Iraq war and the war itself looks like a mistake in hindsight. Only Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and Colin Powell 'know' whether they really believed Iraq was a big enough threat to go to war or we went to war for another reason. We may never really know the answer.

    I have no problem with the letter writer, Dowd, or anyone who 'believes' that these men knew Saddam had no WMD's and posed no real threat because they may be correct. However, they may also be wrong and these men may have 'believed' what they told us in the run up to war.

    At any rate, there were multiple mistakes made during the war and these men are accountable for those mistakes.

    Michael

  2. wtplv - "Only Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and Colin Powell 'know' whether they really believed Iraq was a big enough threat to go to war or we went to war for another reason."

    I completely disagree. They knew intel was based on BS which is why Colin Powell quit after learning he was duped by the Bush leadership. Bush the Lesser wanted to be a war time president as was his daddy and he fudged, lied, misinformed, or what ever it took to get us into war. If you play back those videos you can see how the excuses changed from day to day. Outing Valerie Plame was one of the tools they used in trying to discredit her husband who refused to lie for the Bush administration over "yellow cake" not found to be shipped to Iraq and aluminum tubing supposedly used in centrifuges.

    The Iraqi War has cost $2 trillion and climbing with the care of injured vets. Killing hundreds of thousands of none combat innocent civilians is no way to establish diplomacy.

    On the financial side, you can't cut taxes for the wealthiest people in the country and then engage in wars that cost billions of dollars a week to maintain. The only people to gain are the investors in companies such as Halliburton and KBR.

    In War is a Racket, Smedley Butler wrote, "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents." General Butler wrote that in 1935 and much hasn't changed since; but for technology.

    Good letter Ze-ev Amzalem, thanks.

    Somebody look for Future's gravity boots, I think he lost them again.

  3. Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and the lot of terrorists responsible for 9-11 are dead. Thank you George, Dick and Don and our military heroes. And President Obama too for continuing what his predecessor started.

    Carmine D

  4. Mistakes were made. The big question, yet to be answered, is did we learn enough from those mistakes or will we repeat them?

  5. Vernos,

    You may be completely correct in what you 'believe'. My point is that nobody, not Colin Powell, Cheney, Bush or Rumsfeld has said they knew the intelligence was flawed but took us to war anyway.

    There is much evidence to show that the intelligence was flawed, but that doesn't 'prove' these men and others did not believe the intelligence was accurate.

    You and others don't like the war, and don't like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell and the choices they made and I get that. In a court of law however, unless you could get one or all of them to
    'admit' they 'knew' the intelligence was inaccurate, it would be a travesty of justice to convict them of anything.... other than foolishly believing flawed intelligence.... and although that may have been stupid, it isn't a crime.

    Michael

  6. Vernos,

    One more thing. I have great respect for Colin Powell and he has been repeatedly asked if he resigned because Bush and Cheney knew the intel was flawed and took us to war anyway. He hasn't said 'yes' that was the case. I know you'll say that's because he is an honorable man and that may be 'correct', but until he does answer that question with a simple yes, or Bush, Cheney or Rumsfeld admit what you believe, we just cannot 'know'; we can only 'guess'.

    Michael

  7. And Vernos, let me add this: I do not want to believe that an elected President intentionally used what he knew to be flawed intelligence to place us into a war where we did not belong to avenge his dad; for oil, because he was a cowboy, etc. I know it is possible, but I don't want it to be the truth.

    Likewise, I do not want to believe another elected President really knows how dangerous the deficits and the debt is to our country and our children but refuses to address it in a meaningful way because it is too difficult, too unpopular and it gets in the way of other priorities he feels are more important. I know it is possible, but I don't want it to be the truth.

    People are capable of doing very good things but also very bad things. That's just a fact and it doesn't become not a fact because the person is someone you like or dislike.

    Michael

  8. wtplv - "And Vernos, let me add this: I do not want to believe that an elected President intentionally used what he knew to be flawed intelligence to place us into a war where we did not belong to avenge his dad; for oil, because he was a cowboy, etc. I know it is possible, but I don't want it to be the truth."

    LBJ did it, he and others in his administration took us into Vietnam over lies. The Pentagon Papers exposed the scam perpetrated on the American people. When will Americans begin to understand a few of our leaders are capable of almost anything to gain or maintain control of power. Does Joe McCarthy or Tricky Dick sound familiar?

  9. Vernos,

    I know all of it is 'possible'. I've lived long enough to see some of it. However, we'd all be better off if we would stick to what we can 'see' and stop attaching 'motives' we can't know.

    Bush took us into Iraq. History proved that was a mistake, but we still don't 'know' the motives behind the decision. Obama probably isn't going to address the deficits and debt much. I think history will show that to be a mistake.

    The difference is that I'm not willing to label Bush a 'war monger' or Obama a 'socialist' unless I 'know' the motives for the decisions they are making.

    I try to stick to commenting on the decisions and stay away from 'labels' that are connected to their 'motives'.... something I cannot know.

    This jumping to conclusions about 'motives' is destroying us and keeping us from compromise.

    That's my point...

    Michael

  10. Pres.G.W.Bush an V.P. and Cheney had no clue of what was going on in Iraq.

    They both proved how uninformed they were with events happening in Iraq. By having Bush aboard a navy jet plane and land it on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln on May 2,2003 and declare that major combat is over in Iraq,"Mission Accomplished".

    After that declaration was made we spent one trillion dollars and with the loss of life of 4,500 men and women, and over 40,000 wounded warriors. The war lasted over 8 years of U.S. involvement.And to think
    V.P.Cheney has no regrets. That new heart he received did nothing for him except give him more time to defend the Bush Administration's Iraq failures.

  11. And yet you all give a pass to the latest war crimes president who claims he just voted on things but had no clue to what they were.

    No matter how hard you libs try, you can;t have it both ways. want to charge Bush with war crimes? The socialist you replaced him with would face the same charges for the crimes he has committed since in office as well as for voting to allow Bush to do what he did. Obama had the same intelligence available to him as did Bush.

  12. Given that almost all the media is biased either right or left, I have to wonder how Rusty57 'knows' that the sign was actually put up by the crew and Bush had nothing to do with it or that Lastthrows 'knows' that Bush stopped the ship just over the horizon so that he could have his photo op.

    We are all so guilty of so easily believing anything the biased media tells us, as long as it conforms to our belief systems. Perhaps that is part of the reason so many of us elected Bush twice, and now Obama twice and we re-elect, over and over again people like McCain, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid, Boehner, etc.

    We have met the enemy and he is us.....

    Michael

  13. Rusty57,

    Those that hate Bush would complain about anything he was involved with. The 'real' problem is that his appearance made it seem like we had won and then the insurgency broke out and everything changed.

    Michael

  14. Comment removed by moderator. - -

  15. "Pres.G.W.Bush an V.P. and Cheney had no clue of what was going on in Iraq."

    Sam et al:

    Saddam Hussein and Iraq gave safe haven to al Qaeda and the 9-11 terrorists. President Bush sent US troops to Iraq as did other countries in retaliation and reciprocation. THEN President Bush instituted the drone program.

    "After 9/11, then U.S. President George W. Bush ordered U.S. drones, at that point equipped with missiles, to kill leaders of al Qaeda, first in Afghanistan and later in Yemen and Pakistan. From June 2004, when the strikes in Pakistan began, to January 2009, the Bush administration authorized 44 strikes in the rugged northwestern region of Pakistan."

    If you like the drone program, and you do, then give former President Bush credit for starting and using it. Just like you give President Obama credit for expanding it.

    Carmine D

  16. Jeff:

    I suggest you read the 2008 Pentagon report before saying I lied. You may not agree with the report, but it clearly says both men [Bin Laden and Hussein] had mutual ties with their evil intent and acts against the US.

    Carmine D

  17. Here's an excerpt. You can research and read the rest:

    "In March 2008, a Pentagon-sponsored study was released, entitled Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents, based on the review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents captured after the 2003 US invasion. The study "found no 'smoking gun' (i.e., direct connection) between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda."[109] It did note that in the early 1990s "Saddam supported groups that either associated directly with al Qaeda (such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri) or that generally shared al Qaeda's stated goals and objectives."[110]

    The abstract states that, "while these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist--operatives monitored closely... This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a 'de facto' link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust."[111]

    Carmine D

  18. The salient feature of the Iraq war was an excuse and opportunity by Bush, Cheney et.al. to throw money away. It was more expensive than WWII in 2012 dollars and created the massive debt that is claiming the National Parks, postal delivery days, medical care, etc.

    Cheney and the GOP now claim that cut backs in social programs are required to rein in Government spending. At the same time, Senate Resolution 65, the Back Door to War with Iran is introduced (Feb 28, 2013).

    S.Res.65 "(8) urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in self-defense, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence."

    Note that there is NO LIMIT on spending or involvement in the next Iran war. Another multitrillion dollar, decade long war is being planned by Lindsey Graham [R-SC]. Cheney will look like a wimp after the neo-confederates appropriate the treasury for elimination of another nuclear weapons program that doesn't exist in the first place. And like the Iraq war, don't expect an apology.

  19. "Ayman Mohammed Rabie al-Zawahiri,[2] (Arabic: Ayman Muhammad Rabi az-Zawahiri, born 19 June 1951) is an Egyptian physician,[3] Islamic theologian and current leader of the militant Islamist organization al-Qaeda.[4] Ayman al-Zawahiri is a former member of Islamist organizations which have both orchestrated and carried out multiple attacks on the continents of North America, Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

    The U.S. State Department has offered a US$25 million dollar reward for information leading to al-Zawahiri's apprehension since the 9/11 attacks and remains in effect.[5] He is under worldwide sanctions by the United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee as a member or affiliate of al-Qaeda.[6]"

    Carmine D

  20. An interesting comment PISCES41 (Jim Weber) at 5:16 a.m. today: "Mistakes were made. The big question, yet to be answered, is did we learn enough from those mistakes or will we repeat them?" We did not learn from the lessons of Vietnam but, rather, repeated them in Iraq, there is no reason to expect any learning from Iraq.

    In both Vietnam and Iraq: We were taken into an overseas war of opportunity by the lies of our leadership. In both, we began the war with NO idea what goals we wanted to accomplish, but faked up some goals as we went along. In both, we continued the war long after our faked goals were achieved. In both we were supporting an unpopular regime. In both, large segments of the local population wanted us gone, long before we did leave. In both, the greatest number of casualties were among the local civilian population. In both, war crimes were committed and not at all, or were only poorly, investigated and punished. In both cases we waged a significant war with NO declaration of war from Congress, only mealy-mouthed "Oh, well. Go ahead." declarations. In both, we were defeated, practically or actually, take your choice, by forces that were not nearly as technologically advanced in the arts of war as we were. In both cases, once our civilian population realized the dead-end we were put into, it demanded a withdrawal - yet our "fearless leaders" refused.

    I could continue, but I'm concerned about carpal-tunnel syndrome...

  21. Obviously some of you people won't allow yourselves come to the realization that our gov't. will intentionally lie to us. It's called propaganda and until people understand that, we are fair game for further minipulation.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0japj2XWN...

  22. Wtplv-michael

    I marvel at how you go from one sentence to another changing your views as you proceed. Cheney is a chicken hawk and you know it-yet you struggle to defend him with your alternating comments, and to further attempts to justify you add an occasional "red herring". If this is "how" an independent is supposed to thinks-I say forget about it.
    Carmine is a hard core right winger and there is no hope to change any of his views even with clear and concise proof. However, sometimes you say the right thing, then two paragraphs later you inject something you know is BS.

  23. Carmine,

    Pres.G.W.Bush invaded Iraq with false information about weapons of mass destruction.That was the reason he gave for the invasion, which was completely false.

    He was way over his head as a leader and his actions as President proved that.May God forgive him for his misdeeds,because no one else will.

  24. Sam:

    I was and still am against sending troops into Iraq. BUT read the 2008 Pentagon Report and Bush had credible and legitimate cause for invasion. You may not agree, like me, BUT we were not Commander-in-Chief and didn't have to make the call. Al Qaeda IS STILL in Iraq and responsible for untold bombings against US and our soldiers. Just this week and the other day.

    Now what do you say about former President Bush's drone program...and keep in mind I, as you know, oppose it then and now. You on the other hand are a staunch proponent of President Obama's usage of drones. Who started drones?

    Carmine D

  25. "Carmine is a hard core right winger and there is no hope to change any of his views even with clear and concise proof"

    Roger Warrick:

    If you think that, I'd hate to be the forensic doctor who has to perform an autopsy on your brain when you die from the lack of using it.

    Carmine D

  26. "And Obama was one of the few good men who said we
    should NOT invade Iraq."

    Teamster:

    Candidate Obama in 2008 said he was against dumb wars. I agree with him on this. I am too. And to his credit, so was now Defense Secretary Hagel, then Senator, although he waffled on some of his Iraq votes in the Senate. It is generally agreed that Hagel and Obama struck up their Senate friendship in large part to their shared beliefs on Iraq.

    Carmine D

  27. Jeff,

    Please understand that I don't have to watch a documentary to know that the intelligence leading up to the Iraq war was terribly flawed.

    The real question, to me at least, is whether President Bush made the decision he did because he felt that Iraq was a serious threat to America or he knew it wasn't and took us to war for another reason. No documentary can answer that question because the people involved have continued to say the decision to go to war was based on intelligence that turned out to be false, but they did not know that at that time.

    If people want to believe that Bush took us to war because he wanted to spend money (a theory you hear often), wanted to get Iraqi oil for Cheney and Haliburton, wanted to avenge his dad, is a war cowboy, etc, etc, I cannot say they are not correct...but they cannot 'prove' they are correct either.

    The truth is that we don't know and we may never know exactly what reasoning went into the decisions made by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and Rice. In hindsight, many of the decisions appear to be bad decisions, but people make bad decisions for many reasons. I'd like to 'know' those reasons and unless we can get into the minds of these people, we 'cannot know'. We can only guess.

    Michael

  28. Carmine,

    When the weapons inspector's found nothing and were unable to find any WMD as "Teamster" pointed out, Pres. Bush infact pulled out the inspector's so he could have his war in Iraq.

    Instead of listening to his Generals( Eric Shinseki) who advised using 300,000 troops he invaded with just 140,0000 troops. The situation quickly turned around and we were stuck in Iraq for over 8 years, until Pres. Obama pulled us out.

  29. Jeff:

    Everything you sourced, EVERYTHING, predates the 2008 Pentagon report, which is by far the best and final source on the matter. Read it. Like I said, you don't have to agree with it, I DON'T. But it clearly shows that all the available US intelligence, European intelligence and Israeli intelligence gave a green light to President Bush to invade. In hindsight it was flawed. But that's hindsight. And in hindsight we all of the benefit of 20 -20 vision. Even you.

    Carmine D

  30. Sam:

    I was against sending US troops to Iraq, and to Afghanistan and likely to Pakistan, if we do also. I am and have been against the use of drones, unlike you, which happen ion concert in these countries. But, just as I understand the reasons for Bush and President Obama using drones and, your and others support of them, I also understand the reasons for Bush sending, and Obama keeping, at least for now, US troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and possibly even Pakistan. It's the war on terror. A war by all accounts understated by the current Administration and many Republicans too.

    Carmine D

  31. "guess Carmine & his right-wing buddies ignore the fact that junior said at one point in time that he didn't really care about the where abouts of Bin Laden & Bin Laden wasn't a major target for his administration...."

    Former President Bush was stating the exact same all the intelligence and military experts said and are still saying. Taking out Bin-laden would not take out Al Qaeda. And, if you're honest, you would agree. It hasn't. Al Qaeda is just as alive and dangerous now without Bin-laden as with him. Another just rose to top and will continue with every top Al Qaeda leader killed. The war is and has always been on terrorism, al Qaeda, Taliban, and dozens more like them, not Bin-laden.

    Carmine D

  32. CarmineD (Carmine DiFazio), in the wee smallhours this morning (3:57 a.m.) you posted a comment that included "...read the 2008 Pentagon Report and Bush had credible and legitimate cause for invasion." At the time, Bush was CinC, in the pentagon's direct chain of command. I question whether the Pentagon would would publish anything that cast doubt about an order from their commander.

    Just a few minutes ago you stated that "The war is and has always been on terrorism, al Qaeda, Taliban, and dozens more like them, not Bin-laden." True - except for the CinC stating that he had no real interest in finding bin-Laden, the figurehead (at the very least) behind the NYC bombings and the immediate subject of the Congressional resolution authorizing military action against bin-Laden and the terrorists behind that bombing. But he had a very real and urgent resolve to take action against Iraq and Saddam Hussein, despite a lack of any true evidence of either having been involved in the bombing or terrorism against the US.

    At the end, was Saddam Hussein friend of the US? Unlikely. An enemy? Probably. Was he paying Palestinians to become suicide bombers against Israel as BushDepression, (above, 12:57 p.m.) quoted Condeleeza Rice? Highly probable. Did he push Iraqi troops into Kuwait? Very definitely.

    What part of this specifically authorizes the President to unilaterally set in motion an invasion? And use that odd Congressional resolution as his justification?

    Remember, during that same time North Korea was making actively declaiming its antipathy toward the US and it's specific intention to develop nuclear weapons. (Note - Bush ignored No. Korea. Look what its leader just announced - an intent to fire a nuclear weapon into the US).

  33. "At the time, Bush was CinC, in the pentagon's direct chain of command. I question whether the Pentagon would would publish anything that cast doubt about an order from their commander."

    Robert:

    It was released March 2008. Bush was a lame duck President in the final 6 months of his last term. What better time to call him out for his mistakes if not then? With both public sentiment and the mainstream media increasingly sounding the alarms against the Iraqi war and having US troops there?

    Carmine D

  34. Robert:

    Here's the justification from the UN for Iraqi invasion:

    Mission objectives according to the MNF-I

    MNF-I [Multi-national Forces] objectives, as at June 2004 as expressed in an annex to UNSCR 1546, a letter from U.S. Secretary of State Powell to the U.N. Security Council, appear to be:[6]

    "The MNF under unified command is prepared to continue to contribute to the maintenance of security in Iraq, including by preventing and deterring terrorism and protecting the territory of Iraq. The goal of the MNF will be to help the Iraqi people to complete the political transition and will permit the United Nations and the international community to work to facilitate Iraq's reconstruction."

    You can disagree, and I did and still do, but this was passed and approved by the UN.

    Carmine D

  35. "On 3 August 1990, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 660 condemning the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and demanding that Iraq unconditionally withdraw all forces deployed in Kuwait.[39] After a series of failed negotiations between major world powers and Iraq, the United States-led coalition forces launched a massive military assault on Iraq and Iraqi forces stationed in Kuwait in mid January 1991. By January 16, Allied aircraft were targeting several Iraqi military sites and the Iraqi Air Force was said to be "decimated".[40] Hostilities continued until late February and on February 25, Kuwait was officially liberated from Iraq.[41] On 15 March 1991, the Emir of Kuwait returned to the country after spending more than 8 months in exile.[42] During the Iraqi occupation, about 1,000 Kuwaiti civilians were killed and more than 300,000 residents fled the country."

    Carmine D

  36. "(Note - Bush ignored No. Korea. Look what its leader just announced - an intent to fire a nuclear weapon into the US)."

    Robert: Your history is blur and foggy. Who prevented the expanding of the ICBM defense system and dismantled it? Now, Hagel wants to add 42 more interceptors, a s result of the North Korean threat, that will take 4 years to but in place.

    "Axis of evil is a term initially used by the former United States President George W. Bush in his State of the Union Address on January 29, 2002, and often repeated throughout his presidency, describing governments that he accused of helping terrorism and seeking weapons of mass destruction. Iran, Iraq and North Korea were portrayed by George W. Bush during the State of the Union as building nuclear weapons. The Axis of Evil was used to pinpoint these common enemies of the United States and ally the country in support of the war on terror."

    Carmine D

  37. "The Obama administration opposes expansion of long-range ground based interceptors in favor of its European-based missile defenses that call for developing an enhanced version of the Navy SM-3 interceptor that can knock out ICBMs." Feb 2012

    Carmine D

  38. El Lobo:

    Saddam Hussein was part of the same ilk as al Qaeda, the Taliban and dozens more terrorist entities around the world who target the US, Europe, mid east, Africa and on and on. You might think that we live in a safe and secure world free from evil and senseless murder by terrorism but you would be the only one. History here and abroad don't support your view.

    Carmine D

  39. Carmine.
    You have stated more then once that you were against sending U.S. Ground forces into both Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Yet you do imply that Former Pres.G.W.Bush was justified in the invasion of Iraq in 2003.It has been the subject of many in the know that this war was not based on facts, only manufactured
    and false intelligence.

  40. Sam:

    I was and still am. And I will be opposed to sending US troops into Pakistan to fight a war on terror, if we do and we likely will.

    I posted the UN resolutions for both the Iraqi and Afghanistan Wars. Why? There was a coalition of the willing around the world for troops to be sent to both countries and to fight both wars. Not just the US. The US erred and the intelligence was faulty. But that's true of all the countries' intelligence and willingness. Not just the US and George Bush.

    I have a standing rule of thumb. I never waiver from it. A US President-Commander in Chief should never send American troops to fight on foreign soil UNLESS and UNTIL that President-Commander in Chief has walked the battlefield of the American dead and wounded. And seen, heard and smelled the dead and dying Americans.

    Then and only then has the President-Commander in Chief earned the right to do so.

    Carmine D

  41. BTW Sam:

    I was and still am against our drone policies, not just in the USA but abroad. That's no secret. I've said it over and over again here. Drones started with Bush and President Obama ramped drone policy up to another level. I criticized both Presidents for it. And I will criticize the next President too, if he/she does. And likely he/she will ramp up higher than the previous two presidents.

    Carmine D

  42. Carmine,
    "I was and still am. And I will be opposed to sending Troops into Pakistan to fight a war on terror.If we do and likely will".

    I don't believe Pres.Obama will send ground troops into Pakistan.He has withdrawn all troops from Iraq,and is currently downsizing our troop strength in Afghanistan for a exit by 2014.That would be a stupid war(Pakistan)like he has described the war in Iraq as just that.

  43. No Sam, thank goodness President Obama won't, but he surely will use drones. And you know how I feel and think about them.

    Carmine D

  44. Carmine,

    I will ask the same question as Jeff, how would you fight off terrorists?

  45. Not with robots that don't have consciences. Drones take the lives of innocents who are killed in more numbers than those targeted by the drones. And now I ask you a question: What will we do when other countries have drones too?

    Nuclear weapons and drones are the same. Neither should be used ever as capriciously and arbitrarily as they were and are. President Truman made the decision to drop the bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. After seeing the photos of the carnage, not only did he keep them from the world to see, but he said he regretted having used the bombs. Why? Hundreds of thousands of innocent women, men and children were killed, injured and suffered enormously. As Socrates said: It is much better to endure evil than to do it.

    Carmine D

  46. "I have a feeling you would make the worst choice."

    Jeff:

    Your choices are not the only ones. Nor are they true. Israel's leaders starting with Netanyahu know that its existence depends on itself not the USA. Despite what President Obama says. My choice for Israel. Start pouring the cement and building the houses.

    Carmine D

  47. Sam:

    My issue with President Obama is his hypocrisy. As a candidate he skewered President Bush and his administration its use of waterboarding as cruel and unusual punishment. Keep in mind 3 persons were waterboarded and by all accounts provided valuable information for the war on terror. Tell me Sam how many innocent people have been killed by drones authorized and approved during the Obama administration? What's the difference? What do you prefer Sam as a government approved policy: Waterboarding or death by drone?

    Carmine D

  48. Carmine, I will go back to my original question.How do you purpose we fight terrorists? Who I might ad will kill us all given the chance.

  49. Sam:

    Look at North Africa. I've used this example with you before [Romney not President Obama told us this in the October presidential debates when he specifically cited Mali. Do you remember? It came true!!]. Al Qaeda uses countries in North Africa to stage, test and train terrorists. A group of them attacked the multi-national natural gas plant in January 2013 killing and injuring workers there from several countries. CIVILIANS!! Including killing 3 of 8 American workers. What happened? The US provided UNMANNED UNARMED DRONES [INTELLIGENCE DRONES] WITH INTEL TO THE LOCALS so they in concert with their own US TRAINED TROOPS could take out the terrorist leaders responsible for the attack. The two Al Qaeda leaders, BTW, were killed within a month of the event. The surviving Americans were interviewed within weeks of their rescue on American TV [Charlie Rose Show].

    To my knowledge Sam I've answered all your questions here. When will you reciprocate and answer mine?

    Carmine D

  50. Carmine,

    "Nuclear weapons and drones are the same".

    That is not a very good comparision nuclear weapons and drones.Nuclear weapons can kill millions drones are used for specific small targets which kill a few.

    As long as we have U.S. military men and women in combat facing daily suicide bombers. I support the use of drones to take out terrorists.

    You might ask Iran who supply IED's and other weapon's to these Iraqi and Afghanistan terrorists. Why they deliberatly kill men,women,and children,in the name of Allah.

  51. Sam:

    I don't think you are saying that it's okay to kill one, two or three innocent people at a time with a drone attack. But not okay to kill thousands of innocents with nuclear weapons? Are you? If so, then you're saying it's the numbers of innocents killed that make a difference? A few innocents killed are okay, but more are not? That's wrong in my view. Life is life. One innocent killed or 100,000 killed are both just as wrong. Nukes and drones are the same. Shouldn't be used. UNLESS the drones are for INTEL and/or enemy targets and kills ONLY. No innocent collateral deaths.

    I answered all your questions Sam. You haven't answered any of mine.

    Carmine D

  52. "You might ask Iran who supply IED's and other weapon's to these Iraqi and Afghanistan terrorists. Why they deliberately kill men, women, and children, in the name of Allah.

    Well Sam you are making the same argument the UN resolution made for invading Iraq and Afghanistan. The war on terror. It wasn't Bush's war [war on terror]. It was an American war. Both wars [Iraq and Afghanistan] had bipartisan US support [including both Clintons and all the candidates of the 2004 presidential race] and a coalition of countries around the world who all agreed that the wars and invasions were justified.

    As public sentiment in favor of the wars waned, [as soon as the body bags and coffins start coming home it always does] all these pro-war people absolved themselves of the guilt and responsibility. Leaving President Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld holding the bag [no pun intended]. That's not correct history. It's spin.

    Carmine D

  53. Carmine,

    "Well Sam you are making the same argument the UN resolution made for invading Iraq and Afghanistan".

    Iran was not providing IED's and other weapons for the killing of innocents before Pres. Bush's invasion of Iraq.Unlike you I was in full support for the U.S. to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan with full military backing.I was not in favor of the Iraq invasion in 2003.

    If Pres. G.W.Bush had not invaded Iraq, we could have finished our mission in Afghanistan years ago with less casualties and a clear victory.Pres.Bush and V.P.Cheney will one day have to answer to their maker,for their actions.

  54. Sam:

    Iran was and still is a country that sponsors terrorism against the US among other countries. Right now, Iran is supplying weapons to the Syrian regime and dictator to kill innocent Syrians. Over 60,000 in the last year and still counting. Today, the Syrian regime used chemical weapons against Syrians. A concern and fear that many have had and voiced including me. I said here Syria would use chemical weapons over a year ago in order to prevent it's government from toppling to the rebels.

    I supported killing Bin Laden and all the Al Qaeda terrorists responsible for 9-11. Not by war and use of drones, except for intelligence gathering. But by coordinated mutually approved and defined efforts with countries and governments to take them out. Just as we did with the case I always cite to you: The natural gas plant in Africa.

    Carmine D

  55. "If Pres. G. W. Bush had not invaded Iraq, we could have finished our mission in Afghanistan years ago with less casualties and a clear victory. Pres. Bush and V.P. Cheney will one day have to answer to their maker, for their actions."

    Sam:

    Afghanistan by all accounts is succeeding against the Taliban. 85 percent of all the fighting in Afghanistan is lead by the Afghans. And 75 percent of the casualties are Afghans. By all accounts they are better fighters than the Iraqis. And the Afghans want the US there and always have. Sadly, the man in charge in Afghanistan leaves a lot to be desired and still has US government support. But the Taliban are going into Pakistan. Pakistan is giving the Taliban safe haven and cover. And sadly, Pakistan would like very much to invade and topple the government in India, an ally of the US.

    Carmine D

  56. "Pres. Bush and V.P. Cheney will one day have to answer to their maker,for their actions.

    Sam:

    If you are talking about Iraq, the list of those who will have to answer is longer than just these two. There was bipartisan support in the US for invading Iraq. Including all the Presidential and Vice Presidential hopefuls in 2004 except for Ron Paul. As well as a host of UN countries which all supported a multi-national invasion led by the US. Just read the UN resolutions I posted here.

    Carmine D

  57. Carmine,

    We are talking about Iraq. Some say faulty intelligence,others say made to order intelligence as a cause for war.I believe Bush,Cheney and Rumsfeld,left us with a lot of unanswered questions.Colin Powell was duped. They also left a a mess. The final outcome of this war may be years away from a finish.

    I have clearly stated that Iran is and has been supplying weapons to both Iraq and Afghanistan to kill our troops and also innocent iraqi's.So it's no secret about what Iran is and has been doing.

  58. Sam:

    WRT Iraq: "The overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime became official US policy in 1998 when President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act-a bill passed 360-38 by the House of Representatives and by unanimous consent in the Senate. The law called for training and equipping Iraqi dissidents to overthrow Saddam and suggested that the United Nations establish a war-crimes tribunal for the dictator and his lieutenants."

    Why? "Saddam's military repeatedly fired on U.S. and allied aircraft that were attempting to prevent his regime from destroying Iraqi opposition forces in northern and southern Iraq."

    Carmine D