John A. Lovra – 9/30/04

This page was last updated on October 2, 2004.

All is not well in Iraq; John A. Lovra; Beaver County Times; September 30, 2004.

In a recent anti-Bush tactic, Democrats are trying to paint President Bush as a flip-flopper. It’s important to note that “flip-flopping” is not simply changing your mind occasionally. Any reasonable person changes his mind from time to time. A flip-flopper is a person who can rarely make up his mind on any issue and stick with it. We need to remember liberals also refer to President Bush as stubborn because he takes a position and sticks with it. In my mind, you can’t be stubborn and a flip-flopper.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“President Bush wants to be judged on his record in Iraq and his war on terrorism.

“According to him, they are the same issue. This could not be further from the truth.”

[RWC] No, Mr. Lovra, if you believe terrorism begins and ends with Osama bin Laden and/or al-Qaida, you are way off the mark. The Iraq War is one battle in the overarching war on terror.

“When Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain pushed to invade Iraq, they made the following claims.

“* Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.”

[RWC] True, and so did John Kerry, John Edwards, the United Nations, et cetera. On February 24, 2003, John Edwards even said, “I mean, we have three different countries [Iran, Iraq, North Korea] that, while they all present serious problems for the United States – they’re dictatorships, they’re involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country. … And they do, in my judgment, present different threats. And I think Iraq and Saddam Hussein present the most serious and most imminent threat.”¹ President Bush never said Iraq was an imminent threat, but John Edwards did.

“* Saddam was directly linked to the terrorists responsible for Sept. 11, 2001.”

[RWC] Mr. Lovra is trying to be clever. President Bush said there were links between Iraq and al-Qaida. Mr. Lovra wants us to believe this meant Bush claimed an Iraq/al-Qaida link for 9/11. This is untrue.

2004 reports by Congressional committees confirmed there were links, but that there was no evidence Iraq and al-Qaida collaborated on 9/11. That is the same position taken by the Bush administration since shortly after the 9/11 attacks.

“* It would be a short war followed by a quick turnover to an elected Iraqi government.”

[RWC] If Mr. Lovra can provide any evidence this statement is true, I’d like to see it.

“Since then, all of these claims have been proven false. No WMDs have ever been found. Documents used by both Bush and Blair to prove that Iraq as buying nuclear weapons from Niger were forged. According to the FBI, they were such crude forgeries as to be easily identified. Bush and Blair were either duped, or they just lied. No connection has ever been found between Saddam and any terrorist network.”

[RWC] Mr. Lovra can’t even get his talking points straight. No one claimed Iraq was trying to buy nuclear weapons from Niger. Niger doesn’t even have nukes. What Bush and Blair claimed was that evidence pointed to Iraq trying to illegally acquire yellowcake from Niger. Yellowcake is uranium concentrate – milled uranium oxide – extracted from uranium ore.

“No connection has ever been found between Saddam and any terrorist network?” On what planet does Mr. Lovra live? He needs to read the “9/11 Commission Report” and the Senate Intelligence Committee “Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq.” Iraq has long been a haven for terrorist organizations, and not just al-Qaida.

“As more and more of our brave men and women are being killed daily, there is no end in sight.

“Yes, Saddam is no longer in power, and his leaders are either dead, in prison or in hiding.

“Is Iraq better off? Saddam has been replaced by chaos.”

[RWC] This is a new Kerry talking point. Saddam in power is better than a country on the road to freedom. Are these guys serious? Also, though there are violent pockets in Iraq, that’s a long way from chaos.

“Will elections be held in January? Maybe, but according to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, probably not in all areas. If this is true, it won’t be recognized.”

[RWC] Bull! Were the U.S. elections of 1864 and 1868 unrecognized because not all states participated? None of the Confederate states participated in 1864 and three states – Mississippi, Texas, and Virginia – didn’t participate in 1868.

According to Iraq PM Allawi last week, elections could be held in 15 of the 18 provinces “tomorrow.” These provinces contain 70 – 75% of Iraq’s population. I could be wrong, but I expect more of the country to be ready for elections come January.

“If you listen to Bush, everything is going well. Anyone that claims otherwise is un-American, and is putting our soldiers and our country in danger.

[RWC] Wrong, President Bush says the overall situation is improving, but he never has portrayed the situation as rosy. This is yet another example of Bush bashers putting words in President Bush’s mouth and then blasting him for them.

Mr. Lovra appears to be one of those persons who doesn’t understand there are good and bad ways to disagree. It is possible to disagree with the situation in Iraq without crossing over into anti-American territory. Unfortunately, many antiwar folks are so blinded by hate for President Bush they don’t see – or don’t care – that they are making the difficult job of our military in Iraq even more dangerous. In many cases, these very same people wouldn’t be saying a peep under the same circumstances if President Bush were a liberal.

“Well, Mr. President, all is not well. You have no plan, and I will personally do everything possible to get you voted out of office and sent back to Texas.”

[RWC] The old “no plan” talking point. If there’s no plan, explain all the good things that have happened. Was it pure luck local areas conducted their own elections for local government? Was it pure luck we got an interim government installed and recognized by the United Nations? The list goes on and on.

Note that Mr. Lovra doesn’t say whom he supports. This is yet more proof that most people who will vote for Kerry or Nader are really voting against President Bush. Otherwise, we’d have Kerry and Nader praise letters instead of “bash Bush” letters.

1. CNN Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer; CNN.com; February 24, 2003.