Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY):
Hinchey was cheered as “courageous” for a letter he sent to supporters recently that decried the war in Iraq, and which said that history may come to view it as “a massacre.”
Liberating 25 million people and then providing security for successful elections = a massacre. Which dictionary are you using? Oh, and nice of you to slander the military. History may come to view you as "a moron".
The Kingston congressman spent the first part of his presentation pointing out that it was the U.S. government who armed Iraqi President Sadddam Hussein in the 1980s, and that by doing so, helped the dictator obtain chemical and biological weapons.
No, Saddam was not a president but a ruthless dictator. I am assuming that if President Bush killed off all opponents, terrorized the American population, and won an election by 99.9% of the vote, then Hinchey won't be referring to Bush as "President". And no, it wasn't the US that armed Saddam. The Soviet Union, later Russia, France, and China were the main suppliers of Saddam's arsenal. Why would Saddam bother with expensive American weaponary when he could get cheaper and plentiful quantities from other countries?
... Hinchey said, “And now, contrary to international law and against every decent instinct, we are engaging in what will come to be seen as a massacre in Iraq on the basis of the ‘Bush Doctrine’ of prevention, which allows the United States to attack any other country anytime we want and for whatever reason the president feels is justified.”
You do know that there was a (decent) vote in Congress in 2002 authorizing the President the use of force. The President had all the legal authority he needed to remove Saddam. Of course, if you wish to make the permission of France a part of your platform, then by all means go ahead.
It's Democrats like these that make Karl Rove's job easy.