Forgetfulness of McCain and Collins

Date: September 9. 2004
Sent to but not published in the Boston Globe

Ben DeLorio had it right about Senator Susan Collins (Boston Globe, Sept 1.) and David Claffey (Boston Globe, Sept 2.) had it right about John McCain. Frankly I had expected better from these two moderate Republicans.
Collins forgot to mention that from October 2001 until June of 2002, President Bush soundly resisted the call for a Department of Homeland Security. It was only through pressure from the Democrats and especially from the families of those who perished in the 9/11 attacks that President Bush reluctantly adopted the idea in June of 2002.
McCain forgot to mention, in his exuberant defence of the Iraq war, that Saddam was in fact highly constrained because of the UN Sanctions on Iraq; the inspectors on the ground; and allied air patrols in the air
It just goes to show that in an election year, being Republican trumps everything; even the whole truth!

John McCain's rationale for support of the Iraq War

ate: August 31, 2004
Sent to but not published by New York Times

At the Republican convention last evening (August 30), Senator John McCain said he supported President Bush's attack on Iraq because: "We couldn't afford the risk posed by an unconstrained Saddam in these dangerous times."
The Senator seems to have forgotten the situation on the ground just before the war began. First, Saddam was highly constrained because of the UN Sanctions on Iraq. Despite their problems, they had drastically reduced the potential for Saddam buying weapons materiel. Second, inspectors were on the ground in Iraq. Their reports suggested that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The eight months since Bush claimed victory have only confirmed their findings. No weapons have been found.
Would the Senator agree that Saddam was constrained? Would the Senator agree that, based on his own logic that the war was not justified?