Dear Editor:Ironically, Carolyn Sackarison’s July 27 Aspen Times story, “Aspen council won’t call for impeachment,” comes a day after National Review writer Cliff May’s July 26 column on Iraq, “Imagining Defeat,” which could and should be used as opening argument in the impeachment of George W. Bush and his team.But the best of all reasons to impeach are words put forth by Mr. Bush himself when he warns us of the “consequences of failure” in Iraq and the proliferating threat of al-Qaida, which he warns now has spread to Iraq.The question is, did President Bush, et al., ponder the consequences of failure when they took the nation to war four and a half years ago? If not, why not?If in March 2003 victory in Iraq was essential to our survival and if the consequences of failure were so dire to the U.S. and the world at large, why didn’t Mr. Bush, when he took us to war, fully mobilize the country and utilize the considerable resources of the most powerful nation on earth to ensure swift victory, minimal casualties and the security of Iraq – and the U.S.?And why, six years after the CIA warned President Bush in August 2001 that “bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.” was “current and serious,” and almost six years after terrorists struck on Sept. 11 is “bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.” still current, serious and applicable in 2007? Especially after Mr. Bush’s repeated post-Sept. 11 vows to “get bin Laden dead or alive” for the terrorist attacks which left 3,000 dead on our soil.The fact that in the United States of America in July 2007 – after four and a half years of war in Iraq! – we are “imagining defeat” instead of celebrating the anniversary of success, and the fact that after six years mass murderers Osama bin Laden/al-Qaida are more than ever a threat to our country are reasons enough to hold accountable those to whom we entrusted our nation in 2000.Dave FutornickWest Orange, N.J.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.