[Peace] FW: Member of Congress Questions Iraq Policy

Fri Sep 13 04:20:26 CDT 2002

----------
Von: Monika Nur <monikanur at web.de>
Organisation: http://freemail.web.de/
Datum: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 07:48:15 +0200
An: "Cat Euler" <Cat at freewomen.freeserve.co.uk>, "FRIKO"
<frikomail at freenet.de>, "Helen John" <helenmenwith at yahoo.co.uk>
Betreff: Fwd: Member of Congress Questions Iraq Policy

Interessante Fragen eines rep. Abgeordneten im US-Congress

Gruß
Monika

JoanWDrake at aol.com schrieb am 12.09.02 18:23:06:
> This was sent to me by someone who says it was read to Congress by Rep. Ron
> Paul of Texas in the House of Representatives, September 10, 2002
> (Ron Paul is an M.D. and a Republican Member of Congress from Texas.)
> 
> "Soon we hope to have hearings on the pending war with Iraq.  Here are some
> questions I would like answered by those who are urging us to start this war:
> 
> 1. Is it not true that the reason we did not bomb the Soviet Union at the
> height of the Cold War was because we knew they could retaliate?
> 
> 2. Is it not also true that we are willing to bomb Iraq now because we know
> it cannot retaliate -- which just confirms that there is no real threat?
> 
> 3. Is it not true that those who argue that even with inspections we cannot
> be sure that Hussein might be hiding weapons, at the same time imply that
> we can be more sure that weapons exist in the absence of inspections?
> 
> 4. Is it not true that the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency was able
> to complete its yearly verification mission to Iraq just this year with
> Iraqi cooperation?
> 
> 5. Is it not true that the intelligence community has been unable to
> develop a case tying Iraq to global terrorism at all, much less the attacks
> on the United States last year? Does anyone remember that 15 of the 19
> hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and that none came from Iraq?
> 
> 6. Was former CIA counter-terrorism chief Vincent Cannistraro wrong when he
> recently said there is no confirmed evidence of Iraq's links to terrorism?
> 
> 7. Is it not true that the CIA has concluded there is no evidence that a
> Prague meeting between 9/11 hijacker Atta and Iraqi intelligence took place?
> 
> 8. Is it not true that northern Iraq, where the administration claimed
> al-Qaeda were hiding out, is in the control of our "allies," the Kurds?
> 
> 9. Is it not true that the vast majority of al-Qaeda leaders who escaped
> appear to have safely made their way to Pakistan, another of our so-called
> allies?
> 
> 10. Has anyone noticed that Afghanistan is rapidly sinking into total
> chaos, with bombings and assassinations becoming daily occurrences; and
> that according to a recent UN report the al-Qaeda "is, by all accounts,
> alive and well and poised to strike again, how, when, and where it chooses."
> 
> 11. Why are we taking precious military and intelligence resources away
> from tracking down those who did attack the United States -- and who may
> again attack the United States -- and using them to invade countries that
> have not attacked the United States?
> 
> 12. Would an attack on Iraq not just confirm the Arab world's worst
> suspicions about the US â?" and isn't this what bin Laden wanted?
> 
> 13. How can Hussein be compared to Hitler when he has no navy or air force,
> and now has an army 1/5 the size of twelve years ago, which even then
> proved totally inept at defending the country?
> 
> 14. Is it not true that the constitutional power to declare war is
> exclusively that of the Congress? Should presidents, contrary to the
> Constitution, allow Congress to concur only when pressured by public
> opinion? Are presidents permitted to rely on the UN for permission to go to
> war?
> 
> 15. Are you aware of a Pentagon report studying charges that thousands of
> Kurds in one village were gassed by the Iraqis, which found no conclusive
> evidence that Iraq was responsible, that Iran occupied the very city
> involved, and that evidence indicated the type of gas used was more likely
> controlled by Iran not Iraq?
> 
> 16. Is it not true that anywhere between 100,000 and 300,000 US soldiers
> have suffered from Persian Gulf War syndrome from the first Gulf War, and
> that thousands may have died?
> 
> 17. Are we prepared for possibly thousands of American casualties in a war
> against a country that does not have the capacity to attack the United
> States?
> 
> 18. Are we willing to bear the economic burden of a 100 billion dollar war
> against Iraq, with oil prices expected to skyrocket and further rattle an
> already shaky American economy? How about an estimated 30 years occupation
> of Iraq that some have deemed necessary to "build democracy" there?
> 
> 19. Iraq's alleged violations of UN resolutions are given as reason to
> initiate an attack, yet is it not true that hundreds of UN Resolutions have
> been ignored by various countries without penalty?
> 
> 20. Did former President Bush not cite the UN Resolution of 1990 as the
> reason he could not march into Baghdad, while supporters of a new attack
> assert that it is the very reason we can march into Baghdad?
> 
> 21. Is it not true that, contrary to current claims, the no-fly zones were
> set up by Britain and the United States without specific approval from the
> United Nations?
> 
> 22. If we claim membership in the international community and conform to
> its rules only when it pleases us, does this not serve to undermine our
> position, directing animosity toward us by both friend and foe?
> 
> 23. How can our declared goal of bringing democracy to Iraq be believable
> when we prop up dictators throughout the Middle East and support military
> tyrants like Musharaf in Pakistan, who overthrew a democratically elected
> president?
> 
> 24. Are you familiar with the 1994 Senate Hearings that revealed the U.S..
> knowingly supplied chemical and biological materials to Iraq during the
> Iran-Iraq war and as late as 1992 -- including after the alleged Iraqi gas
> attack on a Kurdish village?
> 
> 25. Did we not assist Saddam Hussein's rise to power by supporting and
> encouraging his invasion of Iran? Is it honest to criticize Saddam now for
> his invasion of Iran, which at the time we actively supported?
> 
> 26. Is it not true that preventive war is synonymous with an act of
> aggression, and has never been considered a moral or legitimate US policy?
> 
> 27. Why do the oil company executives strongly support this war if oil is
> not the real reason we plan to take over Iraq?
> 
> 28. Why is it that those who never wore a uniform and are confident that
> they won't have to personally fight this war are more anxious for this war
> than our generals?
> 
> 29. What is the moral argument for attacking a nation that has not
> initiated aggression against us, and could not if it wanted?
> 
> 30. Where does the Constitution grant us permission to wage war for any
> reason other than self-defense?
> 
> 31. Is it not true that a war against Iraq rejects the sentiments of the
> time-honored Treaty of Westphalia, nearly 400 years ago, that countries
> should never go into another for the purpose of regime change?
> 
> 32. Is it not true that the more civilized a society is, the less likely
> disagreements will be settled by war?
> 
> 33. Is it not true that since World War II Congress has not declared war
> and -- not coincidentally -- we have not since then had a clear-cut victory?
> 
> 34. Is it not true that Pakistan, especially through its intelligence
> services, was an active supporter and key organizer of the Taliban?
> 
> 35. Why don't those who want war bring a formal declaration of war
> resolution to the floor of Congress?"

____________________________________________________________________________
__
Jetzt testen fur 1 Euro! Ihr All-in-one-Paket!
https://digitaledienste.web.de/Club/?mc=021106