U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison said in a televised debate with her Democratic and Libertarian opponents Thursday night that she would not have voted for the Iraq war if she had known in 2003 that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction.
"If I had known then what I know now about the weapons of mass destruction, I would not have voted to go into Iraq as we did," said Hutchison, a Republican seeking a third term in Washington. "But I don't think the president would have asked us to."
I expected to go back to a round of meetings [after September 11] examining what the next attacks could be, what our vulnerabilities were, what we could do about them in the short term. Instead, I walked into a series of discussions about Iraq. At first I was incredulous that we were talking about something other than getting Al Qaeda. Then I realized with almost a sharp physical pain that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were going to try to take advantage of this national tragedy to promote their agenda about Iraq. Since the beginning of the administration, indeed well before, they had been pressing for a war with Iraq.
The concession drew a sharp rebuke from Democrat Barbara Ann Radnofsky, who said key senators had intelligence reports questioning whether nuclear, chemical and biological weapons were stashed in Iraq. And she questioned whether those reports were read by many in the Senate before they cast their votes.
"Any senator who did not do what their colleagues begged them to do was derelict in their duty," Radnofsky said.
No comments:
Post a Comment