Iraqi Munitions Fiasco Belies Bush's Claim
The election is less than a week a way, and President Bush is taking his primary message, well, actually his only message, to the people - that we are safer because he's president and that, as Vice President Dick Cheney summed up, we will all be killed if John Kerry is elected.
But how safe can we say we really are when this week it was discovered that nearly 380 tons of high powered explosives vanished in Iraq?
Reports have it that they were actually looted from the Al-Qaqaa military base after January 2003 due to a "lack of security" at the former Iraqi military facility.
How on earth could our officials have allowed 380 tons of high powered explosives - HMX and RDX explosives - that can be used to demolish buildings, bring down jetliners, produce warheads for missiles and detonate nuclear weapons, for instance, get looted? Only one pound of this type explosive was used by Libyan terrorists to blow up Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.
Do we feel safer knowing - now that Iraq has become a fertile breeding ground for terrorists - that those potential terrorists could very well be those who looted those explosives?
What precisely is our policy in Iraq in regards to munitions?
According to current press reports, when this base in particular was taken, a brief search of the facility was done but that the troops stay there was considered nothing more than a "pit stop."
We were told that the purpose of this mission was that our troops were supposed to be looking for weapons of mass destruction and life-threatening munitions, yet when they entered military bases they didn't take the time to make a thorough search for them?
Did the administration not want them secure?
The White House, through its spokesman Scott McClellan, tried to assure us that an investigation into the matter is taking place and that other munitions have been secured.
But does an investigation and assurances that other munitions are secure really make us feel safe when juxtaposed against the fact that 380 tons of these explosives are not secure and that securing all these kinds of weapons was this administration's point in being in Iraq to begin with?
Why was the disappearance of this covered-up until now and what else do "we the people" not know?
It also seems odd that the Pentagon appears to be scrambling to come up with what really happened.
Some officials at the Pentagon are telling us that the base was secured after it was taken in March 2003 and that they had secured the base and the munitions, which contradicts the reports from those who were there when the base was taken.
If, however, it was secure as those officials assert, when did it, how did it, become unsecured?
Others suggest that the explosives could have been hidden elsewhere before the war and moved to that particular base, what, for the express purpose they be looted?
This makes no sense.
But it doesn't need to make sense because none of it really matters as the big issue is that there are 380 tons of high powered explosives somewhere that our officials have NO idea where they are, or who has them.
George W. Bush and Dick Cheney can not go around this country telling us that we are safer because they are in office and that we will die if John Kerry gets elected when they are ultimately responsible for allowing nearly 380 tons of high powered explosives to fall into the hands of those who are most likely to use them against us.
We are not safer.
The only question is now, when are we going to have an elevated terror alert as a result of this news?