Missing Explosives: Criticizing Bush is Attack on Troops

Published on October 27, 2004 By blogic In Politics

As has been documented by several JoeUsers, it appears that nearly four hundred tons of explosively mysteriously disappeared from a site in Iraq, apparently after the US took over the country.

To many of us, this seems like somewhat of a mistake on Bush's part, and naturally enough, Kerry has pointed out that Bush handled this poorly. After all, Bush was warned by the International Atomic Energy Agency, before the invasion, that this site was very important.

After days of silence, Bush finally tried to defend himself. His response includng asserting that by criticizing him, Kerry was "denigrating the action of our troops and commanders in the field".

Huh? Kerry never blamed the troops. No one ever mentioned the troops until Bush brought them up here. Kerry held George Bush responsible. Is it hard for Bush to accept that the buck stops with him?

What's really creepy about this is that Bush has a history of blaming his subordinates for the mistakes made by the Bush administration. You may remember that the biggest mistake Bush admitted to, during the debates, was some of his choices of appointees. When Bush is pushed on the number of soldiers sent to Iraq, his usual response is to say the generals have as many as they've asked for -- which once again passes the blame, and also appears to be untrue.

When Bush inaccurately suggests that Kerry blames the troops, it almost sounds like it's Bush who's trying to deflect the responsibility here. No one brought up the troops until Bush did.

Maybe Bush really does have trouble believing he can make serious mistakes, so logically he has to conclude that any foul-ups under his watch are the responsibility of his subordinates.

Comments

Myrrander

on Oct 27, 2004

Well, of course, any criticism of Bush is a criticism of all that's holy, didn't ya know blogic?

T_Bone4Justice

on Oct 27, 2004

Yes. You didn't know by now that if you criticize Bush or his policies you are guilty of treason and could be sentenced to death? NIce, eh?

Daiwa

on Oct 27, 2004

If criticism of Bush is a capital offense, there's gonna be a lot of dead people soon.

And blogic, you need to stop hyperventilating. "After days of silence..."? Come on.

I'd like to see the full quote, since I doubt you've given us the complete picture or that Bush is either blaming the troops or accusing Kerry of blaming the troops.

This is still, I'm afraid, a manufactured controversy - we have no proof of what went missing when, so it's just another overreaching attempt at smear.

Cheers,
Daiwa

COL Gene

on Oct 27, 2004

The sign on the desk of Bush is "The Buck never stops here"

He did not send the number of troops needed to maintain security in Iraq including the amo dumps. Our military have paid the price in blood for the failure of Bush in Iraq!

Dr Guy

on Oct 27, 2004

Bush did not respond as the report has been shown to be a lie. I guess you just read the hype, and not the story tho. Would you defend a lie?

I dont think so. But Kerry's accusation does accuse the troops of supreme incompetance. That was not Bush's defense, that was his observation. And you only have to listen to him to see that is exactly what he said!

Draginol

on Oct 27, 2004

The materials disppeared sometime between January of 2003 and April of 2003. In other words, they were taken BEFORE US troops got there. And either way, it's very old news that just happens to come up days before the election?

Moreover, we're talking 400 tons out of around 500,000 tons of explosives that have been already destroyed. Let's keep some perspective.

The real scandal is, if these were dangerous materials, why didn't the IEEA destroy them at the time?

blogic

on Oct 27, 2004

"The materials disppeared sometime between January of 2003 and April of 2003. In other words, they were taken BEFORE US troops got there. And either way, it's very old news that just happens to come up days before the election?"

Hi Draginol,

The reason it's come up now is that the Iraqi government and the International Atomic Energy Agency made the point, earlier this month, that the explosives were missing. I'm assuming you're getting the April 2003 date from the NBC report that Bush supporters keep citing. This is what NBC had to say about that report:

"Last night on this broadcast we reported that the 101st Airborne never found the nearly 380 tons of HMX and RDX explosives,'' Tom Brokaw, the NBC anchor, said. "We did not conclude the explosives were missing or had vanished, nor did we say they missed the explosives. We simply reported that the 101st did not find them.''

"For its part, the Bush campaign immediately pointed to our report as conclusive proof that the weapons had been removed before the Americans arrived,'' Mr. Brokaw added. "That is possible, but that is not what we reported.''

Meanwhile, the government of Iraq has repeatedly stated that the explosives disappeared after the invasion.

Thank you for your comment.

Daiwa

on Oct 27, 2004

Meanwhile, the government of Iraq has repeatedly stated that the explosives disappeared after the invasion.

Agence France Presse. Need I say more?

But I will. Those quoted in your source were in Saddam's government, not the IPG. Yeah, I'm gonna believe them, alright.

The whole allegation is hogwash. Pure, unadulterated hatchet-job hogwash.

Cheers,
Daiwa

blogic

on Oct 28, 2004

Hi Daiwa,

Thank you for your comment. Congrats, btw, on the Red Sox win. Go Sox!

Many of the people in the current government were also in the previous government. The scientists quoted are part of the current government. Are you saying the current government is scheming to make Bush look bad?

You've probably already seen this in today's news, but there's been more confirmation this morning that this site had not been cleaned out of explosives when the American troops passed through during the invasion.

Daiwa

on Oct 28, 2004

I'm saying the scientists were part of Saddam's regime, making their knowledge & motives suspect (Saddam deceived his own scientists and other government functionaries routinely), and the news source doesn't rank high on my list of reliables. And it would be foolish to believe the IAEA is immune to ulterior motives & shenanigans, especially el Baradei.

This will all get sorted out, and it may or may not turn out that some or all of the explosives were looted (which I seriously doubt) but to claim today that we know what, if anything, disappeared or was otherwise removed, when & by whom is just plain ludicrous and to try to use this story to intentionally damage a candidate by jumping to accusatory conclusions without basis is pathetic in the extreme.

And thanks for the congrats. I actually grew up listening to Harry Carey & Jack Buck on the radio through many long lazy summers and have been a Cardinal fan forever, at least until adopting the Diamondbacks, but it was great to see the Bosox finally break thru.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!