Americans should know the truth before election
In rallying American troops for war with Iraq, President Bush made many bold statements about Saddam Hussein’s access to nuclear weapons.
In a speech delivered in October 2002, Bush said, “If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today — and we do — does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?”
Such words served as the rationale for the United States to launch a preemptive strike against Iraq. The theory was that America would get Saddam before he unleashed his weapons of mass destruction against us. We were led to believe a strike against the United States was imminent, likely to take place any moment.
Now almost a year after going to war, so much has transpired between the U.S. and Iraq:
• Iraq has been left in shambles.
• Over 500 American soldiers have died.
• U.S. taxpayers have shelled out over $160 billion.
• Saddam Hussein has been captured.
• No weapons of mass destruction have been found.
The lack of weapons of mass destruction led to a change in our reasons for going to war. No longer was it to protect our very existence, but to liberate the Iraqi people.
That song and dance only lasted so long. And the American people are finally demanding answers to the weapons of mass destruction claim. Where are all those weapons we were led to believe Saddam Hussein had stockpiled around every corner?
The White House has repeatedly claimed there was a breakdown in intelligence reports. It’s been said our president was supplied with information which was not accurate and he, in turn, conveyed that misinformation to the American people.
The CIA fired back at those allegations last week when director George Tenet said his organization never told Bush that an Iraqi attack was imminent.
With such finger pointing, an Iraqi intelligence investigation was the next logical progression and Bush recently appointed members to that committee. Launching such an investigation was an excellent decision, but it’s also a significant oversight for the committee not to reveal its findings until next year – well after the presidential election this November.
Such a delay makes the entire Iraqi intelligence committee superfluous. Since Bush doesn’t stand a chance of getting impeached for going to war with Iraq, there will be absolutely no repercussions from whatever findings the intelligence committee uncovers.
If the intelligence committee should discover, for the sake of argument, the president was not truthful to the American people, we should know that before the election. It was our $160 billion in tax dollars used to finance the war. It was our men and women who died — and are still risking their lives — in Iraq.
If the voters know Bush was untruthful, and still want to elect him as president, that’s their right.
By the same token, the American voters should know if Bush was provided with faulty intelligence information. The people should know if Bush sent the country to war based on inaccurate reports provided to him by key advisors.
This is information the American people should know before the election.
If government officials are supposed to be accountable to the people, it only makes sense to provide those people – the American voters – with every bit of information possible. Holding the results of a key investigation until after the election only makes such an investigation worthless.