Fred Kaplan deconstructs the calculated language and arrives at the conclusion:
"Bush has been careful in the way he's worded his charges and rationales. Dick Cheney has not. Last Sept. 14, on Meet the Press, Cheney said that a U.S. success in Iraq will mean 'that we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.'
There's no getting around this one. Cheney wasn't merely suggesting, he was stating that the 9/11 terrorists' base was in Saddam's Iraq. Even Bush had to backpedal, admitting, 'No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with Sept. 11.' The president is just sneaky. The vice president lies." (my emphasis)
1 comment:
Cheney was referring to the Middle East, specifically its most reactionary, autocratic elements, as the 'geographic base.' Since we can hardly attack the Saudis (and as much as lefties say they want us to 'get tough with the Saudis' they do not say so because they actually want an aggressive foreign policy but because its an easy way to attack the Administration) the most inviting target is the 'big three;' Iraq, Iran, and Syria. The administration believes, and with good reason, that a native-born revolution in Iran would be far more beneficial than a change effected from without. Syria has more pragmatic leadership and it was thought that the pressure of Saddam's ouster might be enough to bring them to the table. That has not proven true YET but it was clear that if we were indeed to strike a blow against the autocratic political culture in the region which is the preeminent cause of terrorism than Iraq was the obvious starting point.
Post a Comment