Reckless Administration May Reap Disastrous Consequences by Senator Robert Byrd

Published o­n Wednesday, February 12, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
Reckless Administration May Reap Disastrous Consequences
by US Senator Robert ByrdSenate Floor Speech – Wednesday, February 12, 2003
 

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 American o­n some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.

Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent — ominously, dreadfully silent. 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.

We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. o­nly o­n the editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.

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 recent history of the world.

This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption — the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future — is a radical new twist o­n the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be o­n our — or some other nation's — hit list. High level Administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests of many nations so closely together? There are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based o­n mistrust, misinformation, suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the o­nce solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after September 11.

Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are being called to active military duty, with no idea of the duration of their stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher.

This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be judged o­n its record. I believe that that record is dismal.

In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken us to projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This Administration's domestic policy has put many of our states in dire financial condition, under funding scores of essential programs for our people. This Administration has fostered policies which have slowed economic growth. This Administration has ignored urgent matters such as the crisis in health care for our elderly. This Administration has been slow to provide adequate funding for homeland security. This Administration has been reluctant to better protect our long and porous borders.

In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and urging them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, possibly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like the United Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question the traditional worldwide perception of the United States as well-intentioned, peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy into threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly o­n the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have consequences for years to come.

Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant — these types of crude insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive military might, but we cannot fight a global war o­n terrorism alone. We need the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the newer found friends 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 severely damages our economy. Our military manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support of those nations who 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 that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in that region. We have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan, the dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastated land.

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 o­n another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan. Is our attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning the war o­ne must always secure the peace?

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, becoming an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's oil for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns of power after Saddam Hussein?

Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks o­n Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered by 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? Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous disregard of the interests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to join the nuclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice for nations which need the income?

In o­nly the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences for years.

One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage attacks of September 11. o­ne can appreciate the frustration of having o­nly a shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy o­n which it is nearly impossible to exact retribution.

But to turn o­ne's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest superpower o­n the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by this Administration are outrageous. There is no other word.

Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. o­n what is possibly the eve of horrific infliction of death and destruction o­n the population of the nation of Iraq — a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age 15 — this chamber is silent. o­n what is possibly o­nly days before we send thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical and biological warfare — 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 usual in the United States Senate.

We are truly “sleepwalking through history.” In my heart of hearts I pray that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in for a rudest of awakenings.

To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack o­n a nation which is over 50% children is “in the highest moral traditions of our country”. 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. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.

“Possible Worst-Case Scenarios if War With Iraq Occurs”

The esoteric map of evolution posits that humanity still needs wars to develop itself — for humans to be in full flower as a loving and compassionate species, we need great shocks to wrench us from lesser positions. But, is some worst-case scenario what will have to happen to get humanity over a blindness where war is an ordinary resort?

I think what makes me most incredulous about our warpath is the inattention to the fact that an Iraqi life is as valuable as an American o­ne. It is contemptible not to think this way. How can Bush-the-Christian consider Iraqi lives collateral damage, to be calculated as some objective unit of information, and not as people who are as precious as Americans? Would o­ne side here in America ever open fire o­n another side — like the Democrats against the Republicans, even for the humanitarian reason of stopping aggression? As contemporary philosopher, David Spangler, says, “All war is civil war, and we all suffer and lose.”

I've been concentrating in my posts more o­n what to do to get us out of our situation than o­n passing along pieces about the nightmare we are in, but I want to keep some track going where I'm mirroring what is. And, given I'm putting up few posts in this category, I want each one to be particularly telling. So it is with this transcript of Morning Edition, March 12 o­n NPR, Possible Worst-Case Scenarios if War with Iraq Occurs,  sent to me by Maireid Sullivan. The speaker is Retired Colonel Mike Turner, General Schwarzkopf's personal briefing officer during Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm.

Here's an excerpt:

Perhaps we can pull this off, but here's a far worse scenario that's at least as likely. Within hours of our attack, Saddam launches Scuds o­n Israel. Israel's right-wing government launches a full-scale attack o­n Iraq, creating a holy war nightmare. Saddam, threatened with his own survival, uses chemical and biological weapons and human shields just as he has in the past. He torches his own oil fields, thousands of his own people are killed. Photos of American soldiers amid landscapes of Iraqi civilian bodies blanket the world press which aligns unanimously against the US. The US is condemned by NATO and the UN.

The war ends within a few weeks, but the crisis deepens. The US is left to administer a political vacuum in Iraq. Iran is emboldened to help the Shiites in the south. Disease breaks out, food and water are contaminated and the cost of the war skyrockets. The US economy is dealt a body blow, but the administration can find no credible way out. Britain's Prime Minister Blair is voted out of office.

Meanwhile, al-Qaeda, seeing an opportunity due to a shift in US focus, attacks a major US target. North Korea, emboldened by the distraction, ignores diplomatic efforts to restrain its development of nuclear weapons and begins to export weapons-grade plutonium to terrorists.

These are not remote possibilities, but in my view reasonable, possibly even likely outcomes.

Comments? Click here
Continue reading

CAUTION: More about James Twyman than you thought there was

I share David Sunfellow's concern about James Twyman, and was grateful to get this email, “Concerning Jimmy Twyman,” to pass along. It gives you even more to think about than is in the “Special Report” that's o­n Sunfellow's New Heaven New Earth (NHNE) site, to which I've sent some Twyman enthusiasts, where there are email exchanges incriminating to Twyman about who he claims to be and what he says he has accomplished.

As I get more and more emails urging everyone to follow Twyman's protocols for peace, I keep cringing. Some think that whatever Twyman has done is irrelevant, given that he pulls so many people together now. We are yearning for ways to do good, and I don't want to be a spoilsport, but I can't help but have my doubts about success coming from contradictory energy helming noble causes. I am a believer in the truth setting us free, and, although so many people are wailing in the Twyman camp now, if real success is to be had I believe it needs to be o­n the shoulders of a full body, where we all know everything. Sunfellow makes a telling point about “threatening the credibility of the movement as a whole by choosing a fellow like Jimmy Twyman to be their spokesperson.”

From: David Sunfellow/NHNE [mailto:nhne@nhne.com]

Subject: Concerning Jimmy Twyman

Jimmy Twyman, author of Emissary of Light, is o­nce again inserting himself into international politics. This time, his efforts revolve around creating an o­nline petition to encourage the Pope, the Dalai Lama, and other spiritual leaders to go to Baghdad as human shields. According to a letter from Twyman that is currently making the rounds o­n the Internet, 100,000 people have been contacted in the hopes of producing a million petition signatures by March 18th. Twyman promises to forward the names his website collects to the Pope, the Dalai Lama, and George Bush every day. He also intends to deliver the petition in person.

While I think efforts to get world leaders, especially spiritual leaders like the Pope and Dalai Lama, to descend o­n Baghdad as human shields, are truly inspired, I need to issue a word of caution with respect to Jimmy Twyman.

If you are not aware of anything negative about who Jimmy Twyman is, or what he has said and done in the past, we published a Special Report o­n him several years ago: Emissary of Light: http://www.nhne.com/specialreports/sremissary.html

Twyman, to cut to the chase, has a long history of using international crises to promote some far-fetched claims and self-serving agendas  — chief among them, that he is the handpicked “emissary” of a group of 13 ascended masters who chose him and then left the Earth.

In 1997, I reported how Sun Myung Moon used a similar method to promote himself and his teachings. O­ne of Moon's publication houses, Paragon House, published a book called World Scripture: A Comparative Anthology of Sacred Texts. Moon attempted to present himself as a Messiah and give his movement and spiritual teachings greater credibility (and visibility) by including them in an authoritative volume that gathered together the world's great religions. I thought this was particularly underhanded: MORE ABOUT REVEREND MOON

In Twyman's case, I think it is important to know that his efforts to encourage spiritual leaders to go to Baghdad (and to thrust himself in the middle of this effort as a representative of millions of people who may not know anything about him) did not arise out of thin air. They are, instead, a part of a much larger drama that continually casts and recasts Twyman in the central role of a divinely-chosen messenger.

While I personally feel Jimmy Twyman has every right to promote his work, claims, and philosophies to draw people to his brand of spiritual development, I feel obligated to warn those who may hear about Twyman's current effort.  They can support the movement to get authentic spiritual leaders to Baghdad without lending credibility to Twyman — or worse, threatening the credibility of the movement as a whole by choosing a fellow like Jimmy Twyman to be their spokesperson.

How?

Since the idea originated with two other people, Dr. Helen Caldicott and Deepak Chopra, why not keep the focus o­n them, and encourage folks to contact the Pope and Dalai Lama directly?

TO CONTACT THE POPE:

Contact Vatican via email: <accreditamenti@pressva.va>

Phone from USA: 011-39-06-69-82

Phone from other countries: 011-39-06-69-82. Replace the 011 prefix with your appropriate international prefix.

Fax from USA: 011-39-06698-85378

Fax from other countries: 011-39-06698-85378. Replace the 011 prefix with your appropriate international prefix.

……….

TO CONTACT THE DALAI LAMA:

The Office of Tibet

Tibet House, 1 Culworth Street

London NW8 7AF

Email:<info@tibet.com>

Phone: 0044-20-7722 5378

Fax: 0044-20-7722 0362

Comments? Click here
Continue reading

Facebook Iconfacebook like buttonYouTube IconSubscribe on YouTubeTwitter Icontwitter follow button