[Culturechat] Glasgow Herald--Fascinating Behind the Scenes Account of EU...
Nelreis@aol.com
Nelreis@aol.com
Wed, 19 Feb 2003 18:00:48 EST
--part1_a4.340e8529.2b8566a0_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
That was fascinating. I thought this eloquent speech by Senator Byrd was=20
equally fascinating.
=20
Fay
RECKLESS ADMINISTRATION MAY REAP DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES
By US Senator Robert Byrd
Senate Floor Speech - Wednesday, February 12, 2003
<A HREF=3D"http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0212-07.htm">http://www.commo=
ndreams.org/views03/0212-07.htm</A>
<A HREF=3D"http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_newsroom/byrd_newsroom.html">http://b=
yrd.senate.gov/byrd_newsroom/byrd_newsroom.html</A>
To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences.=
=20
On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every=20
American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.
Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully=20
silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the=20
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=20
uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the=20
editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of th=
e=20
prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.
And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt=
=20
to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents=20=
a=20
turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the=20
recent history of the world.
This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary=20
doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrin=
e=20
of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation can=20
legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be=20
threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the traditional idea=20
of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and=20
the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism,=20
making ma! ny countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our=20
-- or some other nation's -- hit list. High level Administration figures=20
recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a=20
possible attack against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise=20
than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has=20
tied the vital economic and security interests of many nations so closely=20
together? There are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and=20
U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation.=20
Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, suspicion, and alarming=20
rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the once solid alliance against=20
global terrorism which existed after September 11.
Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little=20
guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are=20
being called to active military duty, with no ide! a of the duration of thei=
r=20
stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less tha=
n=20
adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also=20
short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fue=
l=20
prices are rising and may soon spike higher.
This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be judge=
d=20
on its record. I believe that that record is dismal.
In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. I=
n=20
fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and urgin=
g=20
them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, possibly=20
crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like the Unite=
d=20
Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question the=20
traditional worldwide perception of the United States as well-intentioned,=20
peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy int=
o=20
threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly o=
n=20
the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have=20
consequences for years to come.
Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, denigratin=
g=20
powerful European allies as irrelevant -- these types of crude=20
insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive militar=
y=20
might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone. We need the=20
cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the newer=20
found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. Our awesome military=20
machine will do us little good if we suffer another devastating attack on ou=
r=20
homeland which severely damages our economy. Our military manpower is alread=
y=20
stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support of those nations who=20
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=
=20
that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in that region. We=
=20
have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan, the=
=20
dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastated=20
land.
Pakistan as well is at risk of destabilizing forces. This Administration has=
=20
not finished the first war against terrorism and yet it is eager to embark o=
n=20
another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan. Is our=20
attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning the war on=
e=20
must always secure the peace?
And yet we hear little about the aftermath of war in Iraq. In the absence of=
=20
plans, speculation abroad is rife. Will we seize Iraq's oil fields, becoming=
=20
an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's oil=20
for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns of powe=
r=20
after Saddam Hussein?
Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks on=20
Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the=20
Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered by=
=20
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?=
=20
Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous disregard of the=20
interests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to join th=
e=20
nuclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice for=20
nations which need the income?
In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant=20
Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences=
=20
for years.
One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage=20
attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having only a=
=20
shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly=20
impossible to exact retribution.
But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely=20
destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is=20
currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the=
=20
awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest=20
superpower o! n the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by this=20
Administration are outrageous. There is no other word.
Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of=20
horrific infliction of death and destruction on the population of the nation=
=20
of Iraq -- a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age 15 --=20
this chamber is silent. On what is possibly only days before we send=20
thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical and=20
biological warfare -- this chamber is silent. On the eve of what could=20
possibly be a vicious terrorist attack in retaliation for our attack on Iraq=
,=20
it is business as usual in the United States Senate.
We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of hearts I pray=20
that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in for a=20
rudest of awakenings.
To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a las=
t=20
resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any=20
President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation=20
which is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions of our=20
country". This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears to be=20
having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a corner s=
o=20
quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our own=
=20
making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.
=A0
--part1_a4.340e8529.2b8566a0_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0">That was fascinating. I thought this eloquent sp=
eech by Senator Byrd was equally fascinating.<BR>
<BR>
Fay<BR>
<BR>
RECKLESS ADMINISTRATION MAY REAP DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES<BR>
By US Senator Robert Byrd<BR>
Senate Floor Speech - Wednesday, February 12, 2003<BR>
<A HREF=3D"http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0212-07.htm">http://www.commo=
ndreams.org/views03/0212-07.htm</A><BR>
<A HREF=3D"http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_newsroom/byrd_newsroom.html">http://b=
yrd.senate.gov/byrd_newsroom/byrd_newsroom.html</A><BR>
<BR>
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 A=
merican on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.<BR>
<BR>
Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully sil=
ent. 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.<BR>
<BR>
We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own un=
certainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the edi=
torial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of the p=
rudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.<BR>
<BR>
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=20=
recent history of the world.<BR>
<BR>
This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctri=
ne applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of p=
reemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitim=
ately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threaten=
ing in the future -- is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self=20=
defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the UN C=
harter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making ma!=
ny countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or some=
other nation's -- hit list. High level Administration figures recently refu=
sed to take nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a possible atta=
ck against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise than this type=20=
of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has tied the vital e=
conomic and security interests of many nations so closely together? There ar=
e huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions ar=
e suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based=
on mistrust, misinformation, suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. lea=
ders is fracturing the once solid alliance against global terrorism which ex=
isted after September 11.<BR>
<BR>
Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little gu=
idance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are bein=
g called to active military duty, with no ide! a of the duration of their st=
ay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less than=20=
adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also short=
-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel pri=
ces are rising and may soon spike higher.<BR>
<BR>
This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be judge=
d on its record. I believe that that record is dismal.<BR>
<BR>
In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. I=
n fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and urg=
ing them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, possi=
bly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like the U=
nited Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question the tra=
ditional worldwide perception of the United States as well-intentioned, peac=
ekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy into th=
reats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly on=20=
the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have consequ=
ences for years to come.<BR>
<BR>
Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, denigratin=
g powerful European allies as irrelevant -- these types of crude insensitivi=
ties can do our great nation no good. We may have massive military might, bu=
t we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone. We need the cooperation a=
nd friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the newer found friends=20=
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 s=
everely damages our economy. Our military manpower is already stretched thin=
and we will need the augmenting support of those nations who can supply tro=
op strength, not just sign letters cheering us on.<BR>
<BR>
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. W=
e have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan, t=
he dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastat=
ed land.<BR>
<BR>
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=20=
on another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan. Is o=
ur attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning the war=
one must always secure the peace?<BR>
<BR>
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, becomin=
g an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's oi=
l for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns of po=
wer after Saddam Hussein?<BR>
<BR>
Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks on Is=
rael? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the Jordanian=
and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered by Iran whi=
ch has much closer ties to terrorism than Iraq?<BR>
<BR>
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 int=
erests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to join the n=
uclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice for natio=
ns which need the income?<BR>
<BR>
In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant Administrati=
on has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences for years.<=
BR>
<BR>
One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage att=
acks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having only a sh=
adow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly impossi=
ble to exact retribution.<BR>
<BR>
But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely destabili=
zing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is currently witnes=
sing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the awesome power a=
nd responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest superpower o! n the=
planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by this Administration are=20=
outrageous. There is no other word.<BR>
<BR>
Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of horrif=
ic infliction of death and destruction on the population of the nation of Ir=
aq -- a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age 15 -- this c=
hamber is silent. On what is possibly only days before we send thousands of=20=
our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical and biological warfa=
re -- 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 u=
sual in the United States Senate.<BR>
<BR>
We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of hearts I pray th=
at this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in for a rud=
est of awakenings.<BR>
<BR>
To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a las=
t resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any Pres=
ident who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation whic=
h is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions of our country".=20=
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. Ou=
r challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our own making. Pe=
rhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D3=
FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D3=
FAMILY=3D"SERIF" FACE=3D"Times New Roman" LANG=3D"0">=A0</FONT><FONT COLOR=
=3D"#000000" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERI=
F" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_a4.340e8529.2b8566a0_boundary--