…not just KSM, but all those Democrats who said we couldn’t fight the war on terror and the war in Iraq at the same time. I’m writing my syndicated column about it. Here’s the rough start (if you have any other examples or thoughts, please let me know, but not after 12:30 PM):
The only Democratic presidential candidate who voted against the Iraq war resolution in Congress is Bob Graham. The Florida Senator, widely considered one of the few Democrats with serious national-security credentials, cast his “nay” chiefly for one reason–a war in Iraq would supposedly distract the administration from the more important war on terror.
The mere buildup to war was forcing the administration to give al Qaeda a pass, according to Graham. As USA Today reported a month ago, “Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., said Bush has `lost focus’ on the war on terrorism. `Osama bin Laden and about two-thirds of his key operatives are still on the loose,’ he said.”
Since the terror war and a war in Iraq were mutually incompatible, Graham argued, the U.S. should drop Iraq and concentrate on the terrorists who might launch attacks in retaliation for a second Gulf War. “So, to me,” he explained on CNN, “smartness says, let’s try to reduce the capacity of those terrorists before we get them into the position that they’re most likely to have their trigger pulled. And then we’ll fight the war against Saddam Hussein.”
Rarely in American politics is an argument so utterly and directly refuted by a real-world event…