IRAQ
2003-02-20 by Bob Lowen
While we joyously continue making music the world is in turmoil. I think we can find time to pause a few moments: this speech by an influential American makes worthwhile reading. If you feel the same maybe you want to consider forwarding it to friends. Cheers, Bob. ---------------------------------------------------------- >Senate Floor Speech by US Senator Robert Byrd: > >We Stand Passively Mute > >Wednesday 12 February 2003 > >"To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human >experiences. On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of >battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of >war. > >Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully >silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the >nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing. > >We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own >uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the >editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of >the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war. > >And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt >to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents >a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the >recent history of the world. > >This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary >doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The >doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other >nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening >but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the >traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of >international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of >world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they >will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list. High level >Administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the >table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more >destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a >world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests of >many nations so closely together? There are huge cracks emerging in our >time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging >worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, >suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the once >solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after September 11. > >Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little >guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are >being called to active military duty, with no idea of the duration of their >stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less >than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also >short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. >Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher. > >This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be >judged on its record. I believe that that record is dismal. > >In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large >projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken us to >projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This Administration's domestic >policy has put many of our states in dire financial condition, under funding >scores of essential programs for our people. This Administration has >fostered policies which have slowed economic growth. This Administration has >ignored urgent matters such as the crisis in health care for our elderly. >This Administration has been slow to provide adequate funding for homeland >security. This Administration has been reluctant to better protect our long >and porous borders. > >In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. >In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and >urging them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, >possibly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like >the United Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question >the traditional worldwide perception of the United States as >well-intentioned, peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient >art of diplomacy into threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that >reflects quite poorly on the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, >and which will have consequences for years to come. > >Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, >denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant -- these types of crude >insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive >military might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone. We need >the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the >newer found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. Our awesome >military machine will do us little good if we suffer another devastating >attack on our homeland which severely damages our economy. Our military >manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support >of those nations who can supply troop strength, not just sign letters >cheering us on. > >The war in Afghanistan has cost us $37 billion so far, yet there is evidence >that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in that region. We >have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan, the >dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastated >land. > >Pakistan as well is at risk of destabilizing forces. This Administration has >not finished the first war against terrorism and yet it is eager to embark >on another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan. Is >our attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning the >war one must always secure the peace? > >And yet we hear little about the aftermath of war in Iraq. In the absence of >plans, speculation abroad is rife. Will we seize Iraq's oil fields, becoming >an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's oil >for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns of >power after Saddam Hussein? > >Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks on >Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the >Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered by >Iran which has much closer ties to terrorism than Iraq? > >Could a disruption of the world's oil supply lead to a world-wide recession? >Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous disregard of the >interests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to join >the nuclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice for >nations which need the income? > >In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant >Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences >for years. > >One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage >attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having only a >shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly >impossible to exact retribution. > >But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely >destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is >currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the >awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest >superpower on the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by this >Administration are outrageous. There is no other word. > >Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of >horrific infliction of death and destruction on the population of the nation >of Iraq -- a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age 15 -- >this chamber is silent. On what is possibly only days before we send >thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical and >biological warfare -- this chamber is silent. On the eve of what could >possibly be a vicious terrorist attack in retaliation for our attack on >Iraq, it is business as usual in the United States Senate. > >We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of hearts I pray >that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in for a >rudest of awakenings. > >To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a >last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any >President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation >which is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions of our >country". This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears to be >having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a corner >so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our >own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time. > >**************** > -- Bob Lowen Antwerp, Belgium Email: rlow@...