New Kerry Ad Focuses on Reasons Bush Went to War in Iraq
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: National Desk and Political Reporter
Contact: Chad Clanton or Phil Singer, 202-464-2800, both of Kerry-Edwards 2004, Web: johnkerry.com
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released today by the Kerry-Edwards Campaign:
In advance Thursday's presidential debate on foreign policy, the Kerry-Edwards campaign released the new ad Reasons. The ad takes note of the president's many reasons for going to war, as well as his lack of plan to fix it.
Reasons can be downlinked from 10 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. Wednesday at the following coordinates:
AMC 9
Transponder 6
Cband analog
Downlink frequency: 3820 horizontal
It can also be seen at johnkerry.com
Title: "Reasons"
Type: :30 TV
Date: 9/28/04
Paid for By: Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.
AD SCRIPT
Narrator: "Why did George Bush go to war in Iraq? The reason keeps changing. First, it was weapons of mass destruction. (Not true) Later, Iraq's links to al Queda. (Not true) One reason after another-a new one offered every time the facts crumble. Now Americans are being kidnapped, held hostage, even beheaded. Over 1,000 U.S. soldiers have died. Maybe George Bush can't tell us why he went to Iraq... But it's time he tells us how he's going to fix it."
JUST THE FACTS
Narrator: Why did George Bush go to war in Iraq? The reason keeps changing. First, it was weapons of mass destruction. (Not true)
BUSH'S FANTASYLAND REASON FOR WAR...
Saddam Hussein "Has Got Weapons of Mass Destruction." Bush: "The dictator of Iraq has got weapons of mass destruction. He has used weapons of mass destruction. He can't stand America and what we stand for. He can't stand our friends and allies. He's a dangerous, dangerous man with dangerous, dangerous weapons." (Bush, 1/22/03)
-- Saddam Hussein "Had the Capability of Producing Weapons of Mass Destruction." Bush: "Although we have not found the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, I believe we were right to go into Iraq, and America is safer today because we did. We removed a declared enemy of America, who had the capability of producing weapons of mass destruction, and could have passed that capability to terrorists bent on acquiring them." (Bush, 7/16/04)
-- Wolfowitz: White House "Settled On" WMD as Stated Cause for War "For Bureaucratic Reasons." "Wolfowitz admitted that from the outset, contrary to so many claims from the White House, Iraq's supposed cache of W.M.D. had never been the most compelling casus belli. It was simply one of several: 'For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.'" (Vanity Fair, 7/03)
...NOT TRUE.
-- FACT: David Kay Said No Stockpiles Of WMDs Existed In Iraq. Weapons Inspector David Kay told the US Senate that "... it is highly unlikely that there were large stockpiles of deployed militarized chemical and biological weapons there... I think there are no large -- were no large stockpiles of WMD..." (Kay Testimony, 1/28/04)
-- FACT: Duelfer Report Indicates No Evidence of Large-scale Program. A new report on Iraq's illicit weapons program is expected to conclude that Saddam Hussein's government had a clear intent to produce nuclear, chemical and biological weapons if United Nations sanctions were lifted, government officials said Thursday. But, like earlier reports, it finds no evidence that Iraq had begun any large-scale program for weapons production by the time of the American invasion last year, the officials said. The most specific evidence of an illicit weapons program, the officials said, has been uncovered in clandestine labs operated by the Iraqi Intelligence Service, which could have produced small quantities of lethal chemical and biological agents, though probably for use in assassinations, not to inflict mass casualties. A draft report of nearly 1,500 pages that is circulating within the government essentially reaffirms the findings of an interim review completed 11 months ago, the officials said. But they said it added considerable detail, particularly on the question of Iraq's intention to produce weapons if United Nations penalties were weakened or lifted, a judgment they said was based on documents signed by senior leaders and the debriefings of former Iraqi scientists and top officials, as well as other records. (NY Times, 9/17/04)
-- FACT: Secretary Colin Powell: "Not Happy" that Inaccuracies in WMD Intelligence Were Not Discovered Before His UN Speech. "I am not happy that information that I presented as accurate turned out not to be accurate, and, perhaps, with more time we would have found some of these inaccuracies before they were -- before I presented them." (Remarks by Secretary Colin Powell, in Joe Davidson, BET.com, 9/24/04)
-- FACT: British Prime Minister Tony Blair: Evidence of WMD "Turned Out to Be Wrong." "The evidence about Saddam having actual biological and chemical weapons as opposed to the capability to develop them has turned out to be wrong." (New York Times, 9/28/04)
Narrator: Later, Iraq's links to al Qaeda. (Not true)
BUSH'S FANTASYLAND REASON FOR WAR...
-- Iraq Ties to al Qaeda. Bush: "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own." (Bush 2003 State of the Union, 1/28/03)
...NOT TRUE.
-- FACT: National Security Expert Called Conflation of Iraq and Al Qaeda a "Strategic Error of the First Order" "...(T)he conflation of al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's Iraq as a single, undifferentiated terrorist threat...was a strategic error of the first order because it ignored critical differences between the two in character, threat level, and susceptibility to U.S. deterrence and military action. The result has been and unnecessary preventive war of choice against a deterred Iraq that has created a new front in the Middle East for Islamic terrorism and diverted attention and resources away from securing the American homeland against further assault by an undeterrable al- Qaeda. The war against Iraq was not integral to Iraq, but rather a detour from it." (Dr. Jeffrey Record (professor, Air Force's Air War College), "Bounding the Global War on Terror," December 2003, Army Strategic Studies Institute)
-- FACT: 9-11 Commission Report Said No "Collaborative Operational Relationship" Existed Between Iraq and Al Qaeda. "We have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States." (9-11 Commission Final Report, 7/22/04)
-- FACT: Senate Intelligence Committee Report Found No "Established, Formal" Relationship Between Iraq and Al Qaeda. "The Senate Intelligence Committee's report said CIA analysts were reasonable in their conclusion that there was no 'established, formal' relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda, nor proof that the two had collaborated in attacks. The committee noted that no new information had emerged since the CIA's key reports to suggest otherwise." (LATimes, 7/10/04)
Narrator: "One reason after another-a new one offered every time the facts crumble."
DISCREDITED REASON: Iraq Is Critical to the War on Terror. "But no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq." (Testimony of U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld before the House Armed Services Committee regarding Iraq, Rayburn House Office Building (Washington, D.C.), 9/18/02)
-- FACT: War In Iraq Hurt War On Terror Former Bush counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke believes that by going to war in Iraq, "we delivered to Al Qaeda the greatest recruitment propaganda imaginable." Clarke testified before the 9/11 commission and said that "by invading Iraq, the president of the United States has greatly undermined the war on terrorism." (Newsweek, 4/12/04; Clarke 9/11 Commission Testimony, 3/24/04)
-- FACT: National Security Expert Said War on Terror Was "Strategically Unfocused" "...The (Global War on Terror)'s goals are also politically, fiscally, and militarily unsustainable. ... The GWOT as it has so far been defined and conducted is strategically unfocused, promises much more than it can deliver, and threatens to dissipate scarce U.S. military and other means over too many ends. It violates the fundamental strategic principles of discrimination and concentration." (Dr. Jeffrey Record (professor, Air Force's Air War College), "Bounding the Global War on Terror," December 2003, Army Strategic Studies Institute)
-- FACT: GAO Report Says Bush Administration's Actions May Hurt Long-Term Global War on Terror. The Bush Administration's overstretching of the military has put into doubt whether there will be enough troops to fight the global war on terror. The GAO reported, "If DOD's implementation of the partial mobilization authority restricts the cumulative time that reserve component forces can be mobilized, then it is possible that DOD will run out of forces... it is unclear how DOD plans to meet its longer-term requirements for the Global War on Terrorism." (GAO Report, "Military Personnel," GAO-04-1031, 9/04)
DISCREDITED REASON: Iraq Had Ties to al Qaeda. Bush: "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own." (Bush 2003 State of the Union, 1/28/03)
-- FACT: National Security Expert Called Conflation of Iraq and Al Qaeda a "Strategic Error of the First Order" "...(T)he conflation of al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's Iraq as a single, undifferentiated terrorist threat...was a strategic error of the first order because it ignored critical differences between the two in character, threat level, and susceptibility to U.S. deterrence and military action. The result has been and unnecessary preventive war of choice against a deterred Iraq that has created a new front in the Middle East for Islamic terrorism and diverted attention and resources away from securing the American homeland against further assault by an undeterrable al- Qaeda. The war against Iraq was not integral to Iraq, but rather a detour from it." (Dr. Jeffrey Record (professor, Air Force's Air War College), "Bounding the Global War on Terror," December 2003, Army Strategic Studies Institute)
-- FACT: 9-11 Commission Report Said No "Collaborative Operational Relationship" Existed Between Iraq and Al Qaeda. "We have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States." (9-11 Commission Final Report, 7/22/04)
-- FACT: Senate Intelligence Committee Report Found No "Established, Formal" Relationship Between Iraq and Al Qaeda. "The Senate Intelligence Committee's report said CIA analysts were reasonable in their conclusion that there was no 'established, formal' relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda, nor proof that the two had collaborated in attacks. The committee noted that no new information had emerged since the CIA's key reports to suggest otherwise." (LATimes, 7/10/04)
DISCREDITED REASON: Iraq Represents an Imminent Threat to the United States. Bush: "according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order were given." (Bush remarks, 9/26/02)
-- FACT: 45 Minute Claim Has Been Discredited. "The White House, in the run-up to war in Iraq, did not seek CIA approval before charging that Saddam Hussein could launch a biological or chemical attack within 45 minutes, administration officials now say. The claim, which has since been discredited, was made twice by President Bush, in a September Rose Garden appearance after meeting with lawmakers and in a Saturday radio address the same week. Bush attributed the claim to the British government, but in a 'Global Message' issued Sept. 26 and still on the White House Web site, the White House claimed, without attribution, that Iraq 'could launch a biological or chemical attack 45 minutes after the order is given.'" (Washington Post, 7/20/03)
DISCREDITED REASON: Reforming the Greater Middle East: Bush: "A free Iraq can be a source of hope for all of the Middle East. Instead of threatening its neighbors and harboring terrorists, Iraq can be an example of progress and prosperity in a region that needs both. (Bush Remarks, 2/20/03)
-- FACT: CIA Analyst Said Iraq War Has Created "More Angry Muslims." Paul Pillar, a top CIA intelligence analyst who covers the Middle East, said the war in Iraq "probably has increased, rather than decreased, the chance of anti-U.S. terrorism." "Pillar, a member of the CIA's advisory National Intelligence Council, scores the blows inflicted on al-Qaeda since 9-11 as a big success: two-thirds of its leadership killed or captured, more than 3,400 suspected members jailed around the world, Osama bin Laden on the run. 'We've got more angry Muslims, with plenty to be angry about, who may be the basis for new and emergent cell groups,' he said in an interview. 'I don't know how this nets out. Whether we're safer or not, I don't know.'" (Dallas Morning News, 9/6/04)
-- "Nobody Asked -- Not Even Tenet" Whether U.S. Military Action in Iraq Would Exacerbate Anti-Americanism in the Arab World. "Relying on a multi-paged, single-spaced memorandum, (Paul R. Pillar, the CIA's national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia) said he and his colleagues concluded early in the Bush administration that military intervention in Iraq would intensify anti-American hostility throughout Islam. ... When Pillar was asked why this was not made clear to the president and other higher authorities, his answer was that nobody asked -- not even Tenet." (Robert Novak column, Chicago Sun-Times, 9/27/04) Narrator: "Now Americans are being kidnapped, held hostage, even beheaded."
-- More Than 100 Hostages Taken Since April. "More than 100 foreign hostages have been seized since April; most have been released but around 30 have been killed, according to Reuters." (New York Times, 9/24/04) -- More Than 30 Hostages Executed Since April, Including More than Nine Beheadings. "Since April, around 30 hostages have been executed by their captors in Iraq. At least nine are known to have been beheaded." (Reuters, 9/22/04)
Narrator: "Over 1,000 U.S. soldiers have died."
-- At Least 1,046 U.S. Casualties in Iraq Since the Beginning of the War. There have been at least 1,034 American casualties in Iraq since the beginning of the war. American troops have borne 90 percent of the total number of casualties. (Brookings Institution, "Iraq Index," Updated 9/27/04)
Narrator: "Maybe George Bush can't tell us why he went to Iraq... But it's time he tells us how he's going to fix it."
GEORGE BUSH HAS NO PLAN TO WIN THE PEACE IN IRAQ
-- Bush Rushed To War With No Plan To Win The Peace. Bush told the country that the administration would "plan carefully" for a war in Iraq. Yet in August 2003, the Joint Chiefs of Staff prepared a secret report assessing the post-war planning for Iraq. The report blamed "setbacks in Iraq on a flawed and rushed war- planning process." It also said "planners were not given enough time" to plan for reconstruction. A New York Times report found that, "A yearlong State Department study predicted many of the problems that have plagued the American-led occupation of Iraq." The study was produced by experts on Iraq from various fields, yet "several officials said that many of the findings in the $5 million study were ignored by Pentagon officials" until after the war. (Bush Remarks, 10/7/02; Washington Times, 9/3/03, emphasis added; New York Times, 10/19/03)
-- Military Generals Criticize Bush's Failures In Iraq War. "The troops are paying the price for arrogant mismanagement and poor planning at the civilian policy level," said retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Merrilll 'Tony' McPeak. General Anthony Zinni said, "There has been poor operational planning and execution on the ground." "I believe we are absolutely on the brink of failure," retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, a former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East. Army Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., the commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, who spent much of the year in western Iraq, said he believes that at the tactical level at which fighting occurs. (Boston Globe, 7/1/04; CBS, "60 Minutes," 5/23/04; LA Times, 5/23/04; Washington Post, 5/9/04)
-- Members of the President's Own Party Criticized Failure to Plan. Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.): "Clearly, the administration's planning for the post-conflict phase in Iraq was inadequate." Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE): "We weren't prepared for an occupation. We made a tremendous amount of mistakes. We did essentially go after this in a unilateral way." (Lugar Op-ed, Washington Post, 5/22/03, emphasis added; CNN, "Inside Politics," 7/1/04, emphasis added)
-- Recently-Revealed Intelligence Document Contrasts With Bush Statements. "The National Intelligence Council looked at the political, economic and security situation and determined that, at best, stability (in Iraq) would be tenuous, a U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said late Wednesday. At worst, the official said, were 'trend lines that would point to a civil war.' The official said it 'would be fair' to call the (National Intelligence Estimate) 'pessimistic.' The estimate, prepared for President Bush, contrasts with public comments in which Bush and his senior aides have spoken optimistically about the prospects for a peaceful and free Iraq." (AP, 9/16/04)
-- "Senators on Both Sides Call for Iraq Policy Shift." "Senators from both parties urged the Bush administration yesterday to face the reality of the situation in Iraq and change its occupation policies." (Associated Press, 9/17/04, philly.com)
JOHN KERRY HAS A CLEAR, DETAILED PLAN FOR IRAQ.
-- John Kerry Will Push For Training For Iraqi Security Forces. John Kerry and John Edwards believe the President needs to: Provide incentives to improve and accelerate military and police recruitment. Expand urgently the security forces training program inside and outside Iraq by establishing a single, common template for police training and another for military training, and enlisting our NATO allies to open training centers in their countries. Recruit thousands of qualified trainers from our allies, especially those who have no troops in Iraq. Strengthen the vetting of Iraqi recruits, double classroom training time, and require follow-on field training. ( johnkerry.com )
-- John Kerry Will Take Essential Steps To Hold Promised Elections Next Year And Put Iraq On Path To Democracy. John Kerry and John Edwards believe the President needs to: Recruit troops from our friends and allies for a U.N. protection force, and train Iraqis to manage and guard the polling places that need to be opened so that U.S forces do not have to bear that burden alone. Disburse immediately critical funds for election preparations. Convene a regional conference with Iraq's neighbors in order to secure a pledge of respect for Iraq's borders and non-interference in Iraq's internal affairs. Help Iraqis establish a constitutional process for negotiating long-term power sharing arrangements between Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites. Invest in long-term capacity- building and training for political parties and civil society groups. Prioritize training for the legal and judicial sectors. ( johnkerry.com )
-- John Kerry Will Internationalize To Share The Burden. John Kerry and John Edwards believe the President needs to: Persuade NATO to make the security of Iraq one of its global missions and to deploy a portion of the force needed to secure and win the peace in Iraq; Convene a summit of the world's major powers as well as states in the region, and key Arab and Muslim nations, followed by a standing Contact Group to consult on the way forward, and press them to make good on the steps called for in UN Security Council Resolution 1546: providing troops; providing trainers for Iraq's security forces; providing a special brigade to protect the U.N. mission; and providing more financial assistance and real debt relief; offer potential troop contributors specific and relatively low-risk but critical roles, such as training Iraqi security personnel and securing Iraq's borders; and give other countries a stake in Iraq's future by encouraging them to help develop Iraq's oil resources and by letting them bid on contracts instead of locking them out of the reconstruction process. ( johnkerry.com )
usnewswire.com
-0-
/© 2004 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ |
