Doug Miller wrote:
(Regarding GWB's Fall, 2002 speech)
1-2 intro
3 WMDs, terror links, Iraq's failure to live up to 1991 cease-fire
agreement
4 America's vulnerability to terrorist attack
5 universal agreement that Saddam is a threat, danger of WMDs
6 general concerns about threats from Iraq and elsewhere
7-8 Saddam is a bad guy
9 we'd better do something about it
10 Iraq admits developing WMDs...
11 ... and we know it
12 continued Iraqi defiance of cease-fire agreement & UN resolutions
13 weapons delivery systems
14 links to terrorist groups
15 common interest with, and links to, al Qaeda
16 danger these links pose to America
17-18 action against Iraq is part of war on terror, not distraction
from it
19-21 US *and* UN evidence of Iraqi nuclear weapons program
22 why that's a problem for us
23-25 why we need to whack them now instead of waiting for them to
whack us
26-30 we've already tried damn near everything else
31 UN must act
32 if Saddam doesn't disarm, we'll disarm him
33 multilateral support of UN demands
34 reiterates specifics of those demands
35 Iraq needs to change, but probably won't happen until Saddam is
outta there
36 don't want to go to war, but if we have to, we're serious about it
37-38 why continuing to wait is a poor idea
39 we're not going to leave the fate of our nation in any hands but
our own
40 don't worry about destabilizing Iraq: it could hardly be worse
41 Saddam's really nasty
42-43 Iraqi people will benefit most from Saddam's departure
44-45 asking Congress to authorize action
46 reiterates importance of taking action
47-48 closing
Like I said, WMDs were not the only justification given. Or needed.
Based on your analysis by my count the paragraphs presenting
justifications other than WMD, or ties to paramilitary groups,
a 7-8, (maybe 35), 37-38, 42-43. I have omitted from inclusion
those paragraphs addressing UN resolutions and the 1991 cease
fire agreement as the alleged violations of those are either
WMD related, or (quite true) allegations that Iraq has fired
on foreign military aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones. I
omit the latter because the establishment of those no-fly zones
violated the 199 cease-fire agreement, thus in principle
releasing Iraq from their obligation to cease fire. As far as
I am concerned, screw Iraq, we needed to establish those no-fly
zones, but that does not change the facts.
Now those paragraphs that present WMDs or support for paramilitary
groups a 3-6, 10, 11, 13-22, 32-34, and 39.
So I see a total of 17 paragraphs alleging WMD or ties to
paramilitary groups and 7, to other justifications.
Depending on what one infers from the word 'justification' this
proves your point that GWB stated other reasons for war, and
also proves that he put most of the emphasis on WMD and ties
to paramilitary groups.
E.g. It is a matter of interpretaion whether 'Things in Iraq
could not get any worde' is a justification or a reassurance
of minimal negative consequences. I'd call it the latter.
--
FF
|