Three-for-All!

Three-for-All!
by Ted Lang, Associate Editor

September 16, 2002

Columnist Ted Lang There are two sides to every conflict. Democrats are out for Democrats. Republicans support Bush in their misdirected need to punish someone for 9-11, and some of us continue to be doubters.

It is both frustrating and sad to see backstabbing Democrats attack President Bush based solely upon the fact that he represents the party of opposition. They are, of course, not putting America's interests first, but using the current situation to calculate how best to posture for this year's elections. Opposing the president in a time of self-induced national crisis is what is needed for them to score significant points.

Democrats are good at winning; for them, it's the Vince Lombardi axiom: "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing!" It's for this reason Clinton and Gore opened up our borders to illegal aliens to garner their votes and offer them the freebees and goodies stolen from hardworking Americans. And after Democrats Church, Torricelli and Clinton trashed the nation's intelligence services, it wouldn't have been wise to be honest with the American people during the 1996 presidential election concerning TWA 800. That might not only have panicked Americans but fostered anger at Democrats.

This explains Tom Daschle's opposition to anything Bush does. It is opposition for the sake of winning elections. And if Democratic legislation is unpopular, then Democrats and Patrick Leahy must control judiciary appointments to enable judicial activism when a Democrat isn't in the White House creating law via executive orders.

Should we attack Iraq? Iraq never attacked us - it's called the Department of Defense, not War! Although Saddam Hussein violated UN resolutions, that's the UN's business, not ours. Israel has also ignored a slew of them! Considering that the UN was founded by communists and currently wishes to extract our wealth via an international tax and impose their international court system on both our citizens and our soldiers, we have little mutual interest with this socialistically aggressive collective fraud desiring to negate our Nation's sovereignty. And we've always been wrong on Iraq.

The Gulf War was largely our fault. It was a government screw up, we hope, just like TWA 800, Waco and the CIA-FBI mixed signals that failed to protect us on 9-11. In the late 1980s, two things were happening. Saddam was our ally and a Middle Eastern bastion against the Soviet Union's communism, and Kuwait was slant-drilling Iraqi oil fields and stealing Saddam's reserves. Saddam communicated his displeasure to both Kuwait and U.S. ambassador, April Glaspie, in July 1990. We the People, through our representatives in government, indicated that we wouldn't oppose Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, which was once part of Iraq.

When we gave Iraq the green light to attack Kuwait, were we lying? Were we lying then, or are we lying now? Arguments that Saddam "gassed his own people" are irrelevant - we didn't protest at the time. Fighting Iranians and Iraqi insurgents invoked the authority of national sovereignty on the part of Hussein and Iraq, just as in our examples of Waco and the Civil War.

Insisting Saddam is "evil," or that he has weapons of mass destruction, are also irrelevant. We have contained and witnessed the dissolution of the Soviet Union, a communist regime with far more dangerous weapons. We coexist with China and North Korea and a growing communist threat in Africa. Why is Saddam being singled out? He has never been connected factually to 9-11.

Sadness and anger are emotions cleverly timed to coincide with appeals to the UN, the Congress, and the American people to initiate an unjust war. Democrats oppose a Republican president for that reason alone. Republicans want to support war to rally behind the president. And then there are those searching for the truth and preferring reason to emotion. But when it comes to war, guess which side always loses?? ***

Photo of Columnist Ted Lang courtesy of the author
Photo of Bill O'Reilly courtesy of FOX NEWS