Dean's Statement on Saddam
I just watched Gov. Dean's statement on the capture of Saddam Hussein on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopolous. First, Dean made a gracious statement congratulating our troops and intelligence agencies on a job well done - and congratulating President Bush on bringing Saddam Hussein to justice.
Something nags, however, and I wonder if the press will raise this issue: doesn't this just prove that Iraq was a third rate power with a third rate dictator who we could have contained indefinitely? Does the preemption policy and our success in Iraq now mean we have an obligation to invade every country we deem not in accord with our principles? When you look at the pictures of Hussein he looks like a broken man who was in charge of a broken army in a broken country.
Given the lack of WMD's and any way to deliver them, could we have spent less in lives and dollars on containment and inspections and spent the billions of dollars we're spending overseas either at home or paying down the deficit? In a strange way, it seems to me that the swift fall of Iraq and the capture of Hussein only proves Gov. Dean's original point that the Bush Administration's "preemption policy" is unnecessary - and has only served to alienate our (former?) allies. What do others think?
UPDATE (Aziz): Here's the full text of Dean's statement:
Something nags, however, and I wonder if the press will raise this issue: doesn't this just prove that Iraq was a third rate power with a third rate dictator who we could have contained indefinitely? Does the preemption policy and our success in Iraq now mean we have an obligation to invade every country we deem not in accord with our principles? When you look at the pictures of Hussein he looks like a broken man who was in charge of a broken army in a broken country.
Given the lack of WMD's and any way to deliver them, could we have spent less in lives and dollars on containment and inspections and spent the billions of dollars we're spending overseas either at home or paying down the deficit? In a strange way, it seems to me that the swift fall of Iraq and the capture of Hussein only proves Gov. Dean's original point that the Bush Administration's "preemption policy" is unnecessary - and has only served to alienate our (former?) allies. What do others think?
UPDATE (Aziz): Here's the full text of Dean's statement:
"This is a great day for the Iraqi people, the US, and the international community.
"Our troops are to be congratulated on carrying out this mission with the skill and dedication we have come to know of them.
"This development provides an enormous opportunity to set a new course and take the American label off the war. We must do everything possible to bring the UN, NATO, and other members of the international community back into this effort.
"Now that the dictator is captured, we must also accelerate the transition from occupation to full Iraqi sovereignty."
Comments