[wordup] We Stand Passively Mute

[Adam Shand]

It's the first time I've cited snopes for factual information rather 
then to debunk something :-)

Via: Brett Shand <brett at earthlight.co.nz>
From: http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/outrage/byrd.htm

Origins:   Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia is a man of many 
distinctions, both positive and negative. At age 84, he is (since the 
recent retirement of centenarian senator Strom Thurmond) the oldest 
member of the Senate and its senior Democrat. He's a former member of 
the Ku Klux Klan. He's serving his eighth Senate term in a congressional 
career that has already spanned more than four decades. He quotes Cicero 
from memory and can reel off an amazing array of facts on command. Some 
colleagues consider him a throwback to the days of Daniel Webster and 
Henry Clay and admire both his dogged dedication to education and his 
mastery of oratory. Others find him "weird," make jokes about his 
old-fashioned speech and mannerisms, and grumble over his lengthy, 
self-important floor speeches.

In recent months Senator Byrd has controlled the floor of the Senate for 
hours at a time, hammering away at what he sees as the weaknesses and 
secrecy in President Bush's proposal to create a Homeland Security 
Department and criticizing the President's calls for military action 
against Iraq. In a series of caustic and emotional floor speeches he has 
accused President Bush of seeking war with Iraq to distract the country 
from its domestic problems, maintained that the President is drumming up 
support for an Iraq war to boost his poll ratings, questioned how the 
U.S. will pay the costs of going to war, and opposed President Bush's 
asking Congress for the authority to go to war with Iraq as "an 
unconstitutional blank check."

The text reproduced above is vintage Byrd, taken from a fiery floor 
speech delivered by the Senator on 12 February 2003 in which he once 
again condemned President Bush's calls for military action against Iraq. 
Although Senator Byrd is by no means Congress' only critic of the 
administration's plans for going to war with Iraq, his eloquence in 
putting forth his opinions and arguments on this issue has captivated 
many like-minded members of the anti-war movement.

Last updated:   17 February 2003

----

US Senator Robert Byrd
Senate Floor Speech

We Stand Passively Mute

Wednesday 12 February 2003

To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human 
experiences. On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of 
battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors 
of war.

Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully 
silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the 
nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.

We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our 
own uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only 
on the editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive 
discussion of the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.

And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple 
attempt to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, 
represents a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning 
point in the recent history of the world.

This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary 
doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The 
doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other 
nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently 
threatening but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new 
twist on the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in 
contravention of international law and the UN Charter. And it is being 
tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around 
the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or some other nation's 
-- hit list. High level Administration figures recently refused to take 
nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a possible attack 
against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise than this type 
of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has tied the 
vital economic and security interests of many nations so closely 
together? There are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, 
and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide 
speculation. Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, 
suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the 
once solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after 
September 11.

Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with 
little guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family 
members are being called to active military duty, with no idea of the 
duration of their stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are 
being left with less than adequate police and fire protection. Other 
essential services are also short-staffed. The mood of the nation is 
grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel prices are rising and may soon 
spike higher.

This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be 
judged on its record. I believe that that record is dismal.

In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large 
projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken 
us to projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This 
Administration's domestic policy has put many of our states in dire 
financial condition, under funding scores of essential programs for our 
people. This Administration has fostered policies which have slowed 
economic growth. This Administration has ignored urgent matters such as 
the crisis in health care for our elderly. This Administration has been 
slow to provide adequate funding for homeland security. This 
Administration has been reluctant to better protect our long and porous 
borders.

In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin 
Laden. In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his 
forces and urging them to kill. This Administration has split 
traditional alliances, possibly crippling, for all time, International 
order-keeping entities like the United Nations and NATO. This 
Administration has called into question the traditional worldwide 
perception of the United States as well-intentioned, peacekeeper. This 
Administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy into threats, 
labeling, and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly on the 
intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have 
consequences for years to come.

Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, 
denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant - these types of 
crude insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have 
massive military might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism 
alone. We need the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies 
as well as the newer found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. 
Our awesome military machine will do us little good if we suffer another 
devastating attack on our homeland which severely damages our economy. 
Our military manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the 
augmenting support of those nations who can supply troop strength, not 
just sign letters cheering us on.

The war in Afghanistan has cost us $37 billion so far, yet there is 
evidence that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in 
that region. We have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace 
in Afghanistan, the dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in 
that remote and devastated land.

Pakistan as well is at risk of destabilizing forces. This Administration 
has not finished the first war against terrorism and yet it is eager to 
embark on another conflict with perils much greater than those in 
Afghanistan. Is our attention span that short? Have we not learned that 
after winning the war one must always secure the peace?

And yet we hear little about the aftermath of war in Iraq. In the 
absence of plans, speculation abroad is rife. Will we seize Iraq's oil 
fields, becoming an occupying power which controls the price and supply 
of that nation's oil for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose 
to hand the reigns of power after Saddam Hussein?

Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks 
on Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the 
Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, 
bolstered by Iran which has much closer ties to terrorism than Iraq?

Could a disruption of the world's oil supply lead to a world-wide 
recession? Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous 
disregard of the interests and opinions of other nations increased the 
global race to join the nuclear club and made proliferation an even more 
lucrative practice for nations which need the income?

In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant 
Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous 
consequences for years.

One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage 
attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having 
only a shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is 
nearly impossible to exact retribution.

But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely 
destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is 
currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with 
the awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the 
greatest superpower on the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements 
made by this Administration are outrageous. There is no other word.

Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of 
horrific infliction of death and destruction on the population of the 
nation of Iraq -- a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under 
age 15 -- this chamber is silent. On what is possibly only days before 
we send thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of 
chemical and biological warfare -- this chamber is silent. On the eve of 
what could possibly be a vicious terrorist attack in retaliation for our 
attack on Iraq, it is business as usual in the United States Senate.

We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of hearts I 
pray that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not 
in for a rudest of awakenings.

To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a 
last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of 
any President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a 
nation which is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions of 
our country". This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears 
to be having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in 
a corner so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of 
a box of our own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.