(Page 2 of 2)
Those weren't the only top-level warnings regarding a U.S. invasion of Iraq. President George H.W. Bush, after the 1991 Gulf War in which Iraqi forces were pushed out of Kuwait, explained why U.S. forces didn't continue on to Baghdad and topple Saddam. "It would have been disastrous," said Bush. "America in an Arab land, with no allies at our side."
Similarly, Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense during the Gulf War, said in 1992: "The question in my mind is, how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth? And the answer is, not that damned many."
Two questions. The first one is for Mr. Cheney, the same one as 15 years ago: How many additional American casualties is Iraq worth? The second is for each of the senators now running for president: Are you one of six out of 100 senators who bothered to read the National Intelligence Estimate before the vote to send America's troops into Iraq, and, if not, what was it that you were doing that you considered to be more important than reading those 90 pages?
p> Ralph R. Reiland is an associate professor of economics at Robert Morris University in Pittsburgh. br> /p>
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.