Just weeks before the first primary election in
1968, Governor George Romney, father of Mitt Romney, abandoned his once promising
bid for the GOP presidential nomination.
Well, the war of aggression against North Vietnam, launched in 1964 by President
Lyndon Johnson on what he knew to be false pretenses – the so-called Gulf
of Tonkin incident – was going so badly that Johnson, himself, did not formally
enter that first primary and announced
shortly afterwards that he was not even a candidate for re-election in 1968.
George Romney had, in the beginning, strongly supported Lyndon’s War, claiming
in 1965 that our "involvement was morally right and necessary."
But, by 1967, when he announced his candidacy for the GOP nomination for president,
he had concluded
– as had most Americans – that Lyndon’s War was a "tragic mistake," perhaps
the worst mistake in our history.
Quoth George Romney;
"When I came back from Vietnam, I had just had the greatest brainwashing
that anybody can get when you go over to Vietnam.
"Not only by the generals but also by the diplomatic corps over there,
and they do a very thorough job, and, since returning from Vietnam, I've gone
into the history of Vietnam, all the way back into World War II and before that.
And, as a result, I have changed my mind."
As a result of the scorn dumped on George Romney by mainstream media pundits
– not so much for changing his mind, as for revealing that he could so easily
be manipulated – Romney’s candidacy crashed and burned.
Now, fast forward forty years.
The war of aggression against Iraq, launched in 2003 by President George W.
Bush, on what he knew to be false pretenses – Saddam’s alleged attempts to reconstitute
his nuclear weapons program – is going from bad to worse. Dubya’s War – or is
it Cheney’s War? – is acknowledged by most Americans to be an even worse strategic
blunder than was Lyndon’s War.
George Romney’s son, Mitt, has launched a promising bid for the 2008 GOP nomination
for President and appeared last week alongside other GOP hopefuls in what CNN
characterized as a "debate."
Tom Fahey, of the New Hampshire Union Leader asked the first question.
"Governor Romney, I wanted to start by asking you a question on which
every American has formed an opinion.
"We have lost 3,400 troops, civilian casualties are even higher, and the
Iraqi government does not appear ready to provide for the security of its own
country. Knowing everything you know right now, was it a mistake for us to invade
After alleging that just before the invasion, Saddam Hussein was not allowing
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors into Iraq and was defying
UN Security Council resolutions, Mitt concluded thusly;
"I supported the president's decision based on what we knew at that
CNN Moderator Wolf Blitzer then interjected;
"Governor, thank you, but the question was, knowing what you know right
now – not what you knew then – what you know right now. Was it a mistake for
the United States to invade Iraq?"
Mitt essentially repeated his previous non-responsive answer, again claiming
that if Saddam had allowed UN inspectors to re-enter Iraq in 2002 and
if Saddam had complied with Security Council resolutions
"we wouldn’t be having this discussion. And the answer is: We
did what we did. We did the right thing based on what we knew at that time."
Well, at least Mitt’s father had realized by 1967 that he had been "brainwashed"
– forcibly induced to give up basic political, social or religious beliefs and
attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas – several years earlier
by LBJ’s State Department and Pentagon weenies.
However, Mitt doesn’t yet seem to realize, or refuses to admit, that he (and
evidently almost every other presidential hopeful) has been brainwashed by Dubya,
Cheney, the White House Iraq Group, the neo-crazies and their sycophantic media.
The basis of the conditional Congressional
Resolution Authorizing the Use of US Armed Forces Against Iraq was that
"Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the
United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region
and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations
by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant
chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons
capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations…"
But, by the time Dubya launched his war of aggression against Iraq, according
televised and publicly available written reports by IAEA Director-General
Mohamed ElBaradei, and Hans Blix, Chairman of the UN Monitoring and Verification
Commission, Saddam Hussein was complying, or had complied, with all pertinent
Security Council resolutions.
Furthermore, as to the WHIG-hype about "yellowcake from Niger" and
"aluminum tubes that could only be used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons,"
ElBaradei had this to say;
"At this stage, the following can be stated:
"One, there is no indication of resumed nuclear activities in those buildings
that were identified through the use of satellite imagery as being reconstructed
or newly erected since 1998, nor any indication of nuclear-related prohibited
activities at any inspected sites.
"Second, there is no indication that Iraq has attempted to import uranium
"Three, there is no indication that Iraq has attempted to import aluminum
tubes for use in centrifuge enrichment. Moreover, even had Iraq pursued such
a plan, it would have encountered practical difficulties in manufacturing centrifuge
out of the aluminum tubes in question."
As to the WHIG-hype that Saddam could have nuclear weapons in a matter of months?
"After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no
evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapon program
Weeks later, Dubya launched his war of aggression against Iraq, anyway.
So, which is it, Mitt?
Did Bush-Cheney forcibly induce you to give up your basic political, social
or moral beliefs and attitudes and to accept their contrasting cockamamy ideas?
Or did you accept them, then and now, willingly?