The WorldPeace Peace Page
Home About John WorldPeace Contact Us Site Map
Blog Email
WorldPeace Web Design Peaceunite Us (Peace org Index) John WorldPeace Galleries

[little George]


" The Iraqis will be better off living like Americans after we kill Saddam.  And what is so great and so perfect about this plan of mine is that they have the oil to pay for us making them into good little Americans."

- little George of the jungle












Response of John WorldPeace to the 

Text of President Bush's Address 

.c The Associated Press

(Oct. 7) - Text of President Bush's address to the nation Monday:

Good evening. Tonight I want to take a few minutes to discuss a grave threat to peace,

- Yes, it is little George who is the greatest threat to peace and WorldPeace.  It is he who refuses to join the world in a discussion of human rights, global warming and a sustainable environment, but who is determined to kill Saddam, take over Iraq, sacrifice untold numbers of American lives in the U S as well as on the ground in Iraq.

 and America's determination to lead the world in confronting that threat.

- and lead the America for the first time in pre-emptive strikes against Saddam who we at one time fully supported when we wanted to destabilize Iran.

The threat comes from Iraq. 

- There is no threat to America from Saddam.  Anymore than from a rattlesnake who is left alone.  Saddam has no reason to attack America.  To do so would be suicidal.  To do so would end all discussion about attacking Iraq.  But to attack Saddam without provocation is setting a very bad precedent.   It opens the door to all  kinds of chaos in the Middle East and allows China to invade Taiwan.  It is just possible that little George sold out Taiwan for the Chinese to look the other way when America attacks Iraq.

It arises directly from the Iraqi regime's own actions - its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror.

- North Korea has a greater capability to attack America.  China has the greatest power.  Yet they do not have all that oil under the ground.  Iraq is about oil and Americans are not stupid.

Eleven years ago, as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi regime was required to destroy its weapons of mass destruction ''to cease all development of such weapons'' and to stop all support for terrorist groups. 

- There is no evidence that Saddam is capable of making a nuclear bomb.  Where would it test such a bomb?  We know when countries test nuclear bombs. We know they must test these bombs as well as the deliver systems (rockets).  And we know that Saddam has not tested a nuclear device and has no rockets that can reach America.

The Iraqi regime has violated all of those obligations.

- And so have many other nations in the world.  But at the same time, they have the good sense not to use those weapons.  India and Pakistan have nuclear bombs and the good sense not to use them.

 It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons.

- No one has more chemical and biological weapons than the U S, Russia and China.  Shall we attack Russia and China. Can we say that no one needs to fear the U S?

 It is seeking nuclear weapons. 

- So what?  So are a lot of other countries.  It was the U S who unleashed nuclear war on the world for the express reason to end the war with Japan quickly.  Of the many nations that have nuclear weapons, none has even threatened to use them.  

It has given shelter and support to terrorism, and practices terror against its own people. 

- In the U S there is economic terrorism and enslavement of the poor.  The numbers of people without healthcare is America is staggering.  The number of children who drop out of school and condemn themselves to a marginal living economically is unbelievable.  There is domestic terrorism coming from a President who is not capable of handling the job.

The entire world has witnessed Iraq's 11-year history of defiance, deception and bad faith.

- But Iraq and Saddam have made no moves to invade or attack its neighbors.  Iraq received the message of what would happen if it again tried to invade any of its neighbors.

We also must never forget the most vivid events of recent history. On Sept. 11, 2001, America felt its vulnerability - even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth.

- Yes and it was bin-Laden who caused that problem.  And it is bin-Laden who is still at large.  

We resolved then and we are resolved today to confront every threat, from any source, that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America.

- Then why are we not attacking China and Russia and North Korea?

Members of the Congress of both political parties and members of the United Nations Security Council agree that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm. 

- But they do not agree that he is the biggest threat to peace in the world.  They are beginning to agree that the biggest threat to peace in the world is the U S A.

We agree that the Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons. Since we all agree on this goal, the issue is: ''How can we best achieve it?''

- Again and again the question must be asked as to how these tons of chemical weapons and nuclear weapons are going to be delivered to the United States.  And why would Saddam use them?  To use any of these weapons on any nation would immediately united the world to destroy Saddam and Iraq.  

Many Americans have raised legitimate questions: About the nature of the threat. About the urgency of action - and why be concerned now? About the link between Iraq developing weapons of terror, and the wider war on terror. These are all issues we have discussed broadly and fully within my administration. And tonight, I want to share those discussions with you.

- I want little George to share the global plan, his vision of "America over all"

First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone - because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant, who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. 

- Yes and so did Stalin on a much grander scale. And so did Iraq against Iran which we supported and encouraged.  Stalin is dead and the U S S R is no longer in existence.  And that destruction of the U S S R came about peacefully and from within.  We were prepared to counter the Soviet threat but we were not prepared to take the first shot and start the war.

This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning and holds an unrelenting hostility towards the United States.

- Hell, more and more of the world holds hostility toward the U S.  More and more of the world fears the U S because of little George's first strike plan of action.  And we encouraged and armed Saddam when we wanted to control Iran.  We taught Saddam what he knows.  Tell us about our support of Iraq against Iran, little George.

By its past and present actions, by its technological capabilities, by the merciless nature of its regime, Iraq is unique.

- Really! More unique than China and North Korea.  Oh yes.  It is unique in the amount of oil it possesses.

 As a former chief weapons inspector for the UN has said, ''The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature of the regime itself: Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction.''

- But it is little George who wants to attack first and show Iraq what real weapons of destruction can do.

Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant and it only grows worse with time.

- but little George offers not a shred of proof.  More Americans are going to die from the lack of health care than from anything that Saddam is going to attempt.  Does anyone think that Saddam learned nothing from Kuwait and America's retribution on Afghanistan due to bin-Laden.

 If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today - and we do - does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?

Tell us about delivering those weapons to the U S.  That is what we want to hear.  How is he going to attack the U S.  And further, if he attacks the U S, can there be any doubt that within a week there would not be a world consensus that would allow the U S to invade Iraq.

In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq's military industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents.

-Nothing compared to what the U S possesses.

 The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to four times that amount.

- concluded, opined, speculated but not proved.

 This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been accounted for and is capable of killing millions.  We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas and VX nerve gas.

- Just like the chemicals that China, Russia and the U S possess.

 Saddam Hussein also has experience in using chemical weapons. He has ordered chemical attacks on Iran and on more than 40 villages in his own country. 

- Yes we encouraged the attacks on Iran.  And he used a lot of that stuff on the people who we promised to support if they rose up and then betrayed.

These actions killed or injured at least 20,000 people, more than six times the number of people who died in the attacks of Sept. 11. 

- And only a fifth of those who we have killed in Afghanistan.

And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it has used to produce chemical and biological weapons.

- OK.  So who is exporting these ingredients to Iraq.  Let's go after those countries who are making money selling these ingredients to Saddam.

Every chemical and biological weapon that Iraq has or makes is a direct violation of the truce that ended the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Yet Saddam Hussein has chosen to build and keep these weapons, despite international sanctions, U.N. demands and isolation from the civilized world.

- And Saddam will kill Americans through terrorism if little George attacks Iraq.

Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles - far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey and other nations - in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work.

- You mean he doesn't have missiles that could attack New York or London or Paris.  Now I begin to see the plan.  Where ever Americans work or visit, then little George is free to attack.  Where Americans go, Americans rule.

 We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. 

- But not to the U S proper, right?

We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) for missions targeting the United States. 

- Wow.  And where would they get that technology?  Can these UAV's carry nuclear bombs 10,000 miles without detection by the U S?

And of course, sophisticated delivery systems are not required for a chemical or biological attack - all that might be required are a small container and one terrorist or Iraqi intelligence operative to deliver it.

- This is true.  And all it takes is America attacking Iraq for them to use these agents in the United States proper.

And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups.

- Then why all this focus on bin-Laden if Saddam was the real master mind.

 Over the years, Iraq has provided safe haven to terrorists such as Abu Nidal, whose terror organization carried out more than 90 terrorist attacks in twenty countries that killed or injured nearly 900 people, including 12 Americans.

- Wow 12, Americans.  A million Americans have died early due to lack of medical care due to the apathy of little George.

 Iraq has also provided safe haven to Abu Abbas, who was responsible for seizing the Achille Lauro and killing an American passenger. 

- Are we talking about one American here?

And we know that Iraq is continuing to finance terror and gives assistance to groups that use terrorism to undermine Middle East peace.

- The United States and Israel are unsurpassed in undermining Middle East peace.  One has to wonder what the results would be if little George was as focused on peace as he is on killing Saddam and controlling Iraq's oil.

We know that Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist network share a common enemy - the United States of America. 

- And then there is North Korea and Cuba.  Is Castro harboring terrorists?

We know that Iraq and al-Qaida have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al-Qaida leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq.

- Well they have to live somewhere.  Is that were bin-Laden is?  Is that what you are trying to say little George, that bin-Laden is living in Saddam's palaces.

These include one very senior al-Qaida leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We have learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaida members in bomb making, poisons and deadly gases. 

- All that is on the Internet little George.  You can even learn how to build a nuclear bomb on the Internet.

And we know that after Sept. 11, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

- Right, and that is why we need to go in an kill Saddam, destabilize the region, and take over their oil.

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliances with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.

- Well now little George, is Iraq supporting these terrorist or not.  Why are you using the word "could" instead of "is" in this part of your speech?

Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror.

- Other are saying that you are no better at getting rid of Saddam than you are getting rid of bin-Laden.

 To the contrary, confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror.

-Terror like Israel against the Palestinians.

 When I spoke to the Congress more than a year ago, I said that those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves.

- Yes and you were talking about going after bin-Laden who attacked us with his terrorist network.

 Saddam Hussein is harboring terrorists and the instruments of terror, the instruments of mass death and destruction.

- Funny. Most of the terrorist who attacked the U S were Saudis  and none were Iraqis.

And he cannot be trusted. The risk is simply too great that he will use them or provide them to a terror network.

- If you want to kill Saddam and take his oil, little George, one excuse is as good as another.

Terror cells and outlaw regimes building weapons of mass destruction are different faces of the same evil. Our security requires that we confront both. And the United States military is capable of confronting both.

- Yeah like Sharon has stopped the terrorist attacks on Israel by killing Palestinian children.

Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. We don't know exactly, and that is the problem. 

- We know that he has not tested a nuclear device.

Before the Gulf War, the best intelligence indicated that Iraq was eight to 10 years away from developing a nuclear weapon; after the war, international inspectors learned that the regime had been much closer. 

- But still no tests.

The regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993. 

- One guess is as good as another.

The inspectors discovered that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a workable nuclear weapon and was pursuing several different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. 

- And who was helping them in this process?  Which nations were providing the technology?

Before being barred from Iraq in 1998, the International Atomic Energy Agency dismantled extensive nuclear weapons-related facilities, including three uranium-enrichment sites. That same year, information from a high-ranking Iraqi nuclear engineer who had defected revealed that despite his public promises, Saddam Hussein had ordered his nuclear program to continue.

- Maybe he needs these nuclear weapons for defense?  Isn't that why all nations developed their nuclear weapons?

The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. 

- But still no tests.

Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his ''nuclear mujahideen'' - his nuclear holy warriors. 

- And how many other nations are doing the same.  Take Pakistan and India for instance.  And what about North Korea.

Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.

- Really.  And who would sell to them. Maybe we need to attack the suppliers.  Would that be China or Russia?

If the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy or steal an amount of highly-enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year.

- And then it would have to test it.

 And if we allow that to happen, a terrible line would be crossed. Saddam Hussein would be in a position to blackmail anyone who opposes his aggression.

- As we are about to cross the line and endorse a first stike policy against other nations like Hitler and Japan did prior to World War II.

He would be in a position to dominate the Middle East. 

- Oh, so we could not wipe out Iraq with out nuclear weapons.  Saddam could control the Middle East.  What an idiotic statement..

He would be in a position to threaten America. And Saddam Hussein would be in a position to pass nuclear technology to terrorists.

- The basic technology is on the Internet.

Some citizens wonder: After 11 years of living with this problem, why do we need to confront it now? There is a reason. We have experienced the horror of Sept. 11. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people.

- And why do they hate us, little George.  Tell us, why?

 Our enemies would be no less willing - in fact they would be eager - to use a biological or chemical weapon or, when they have one, a nuclear weapon.

- The terrorist already have these chemical and biological weapons.  So why haven't they used them?  

Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.

- I thought you said they could not deliver a weapon of mass destruction over a few hundred miles.

 As President Kennedy said in October of 1962: ''Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world,'' he said, ''where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation's security to constitute maximum peril.''

- So now, little George is a Democrat.

Understanding the threats of our time, knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime, we have every reason to assume the worst and we have an urgent duty to prevent the worst from occurring.

- Hitler and Japan said the same thing sixty years ago.  Now we has taken up their excuse to make a first strike.

Some believe we can address this danger by simply resuming the old approach to inspections and applying diplomatic and economic pressure. Yet this is precisely what the world has tried to do since 1991. The U.N. inspections program was met with systematic deception.

- Before you go on, little George, Has Iraq invaded anyone lately or used these weapons outside its border?

 The Iraqi regime bugged hotel rooms and offices of inspectors to find where they were going next. They forged documents, destroyed evidence and developed mobile weapons facilities to keep a step ahead of inspectors. Eight so-called presidential palaces were declared off-limits to unfettered inspections. These sites actually encompass 12 square miles, with hundreds of structures, both above and below the ground, where sensitive materials could be hidden.

- Could be hidden?  What exactly would you expect them to do?  Nothing.

The world has also tried economic sanctions and watched Iraq use billions of dollars in illegal oil revenues to fund more weapons purchases, rather than providing for the needs of the Iraqi people.

- And who sold them these weapons? Should we not go after these people who are selling weapons to Iraq who is going to use them against the United States.  Let us go after the suppliers.

The world has tried limited military strikes to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities, only to see them openly rebuilt, while the regime again denies they even exist.

-  Well keep on bombing them little George.

The world has tried no-fly zones to keep Saddam from terrorizing his own people ... and in the last year alone, the Iraqi military has fired upon American and British pilots more than 750 times.

- And not a single plane has been shot down.  Now you are telling us that Saddam hasn't been able to hit one single plane out of 750 attempts and we need to worry about him sending a nuclear bomb over to New York.  Do you think we are stupid little George.  You need a new speech writer.

After 11 years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon.

- which he cannot deliver.  And which he cannot test without detection.

Clearly, to actually work, any new inspections, sanctions or enforcement mechanisms will have to be very different. America wants the U.N. to be an effective organization that helps to keep the peace. 

- You called the member nations of the U N spineless, remember?

That is why we are urging the Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough, immediate requirements. Among those requirements, the Iraqi regime must reveal and destroy, under UN supervision, all existing weapons of mass destruction. 

- And if they do not destroy the weapons they do not have, we will invade, right little George?

To ensure that we learn the truth, the regime must allow witnesses to its illegal activities to be interviewed outside of the country. 

-  So let me get this straight.  We are going to gather up a random number of Iraqis and bring them to the U S for interrogation.

And these witnesses must be free to bring their families with them, so they are all beyond the reach of Saddam Hussein's terror and murder.

- Yes and as we have a little Cuba in Florida, we will create a little Iraq somewhere like, Utah maybe.

 And inspectors must have access to any site, at any time, without pre-clearance, without delay, without exceptions.

- Even Saddam's bedroom and under his bed.

The time for denying, deceiving and delaying has come to an end. Saddam Hussein must disarm himself - or, for the sake of peace, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.

-Right now that coalition is really a coalition of one, the U S A.

Many nations are joining us in insisting that Saddam Hussein's regime be held accountable.

- It is the how that is causing the problem.

 They are committed to defending the international security that protects the lives of both our citizens and theirs. And that is why America is challenging all nations to take the resolutions of the U.N. Security Council seriously. 

- Did you say challenging? Did you mean confronting and bullying?

Those resolutions are very clear. In addition to declaring and destroying all of its weapons of mass destruction, Iraq must end its support for terrorism.

- And are we going to demand that all the other nations of the world end their support of terrorism?  Including Israel..

 It must cease the persecution of its civilian population. It must stop all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program.

- So we are only going after Iraq the buyer and not those who sell to Iraq.  Explain how it is that we are not targeting the sellers?

 And it must release or account for all Gulf War personnel, including an American pilot, whose fate is still unknown.

- Are we looking for one pilot? One?

By taking these steps, and only by taking these steps, the Iraqi regime has an opportunity to avoid conflict. 

- In other words, no matter what, we are going to war with Iraq.

These steps would also change the nature of the Iraqi regime itself. America hopes the regime will make that choice. 

- And if they do not make it, we will become an army of occupation and make them into our own image, just like we did with Japan.

Unfortunately, at least so far, we have little reason to expect it. This is why two administrations - mine and President Clinton's - have stated that regime change in Iraq is the only certain means of removing a great danger to our nation.

- Funny, I do not remember Clinton spending as much time on Iraq as he did trying to solve the Middle East conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

I hope this will not require military action, but it may. And military conflict could be difficult. An Iraqi regime faced with its own demise may attempt cruel and desperate measures. 

- And I am sure that you have ordered plenty of body bags.  And I am sure you have increased the funding to the Veterans hospitals for all the men and women who are going to be subjected to these chemical and biological weapons.

If Saddam Hussein orders such measures, his generals would be well advised to refuse those orders. If they do not refuse, they must understand that all war criminals will be pursued and punished.

- Even before they commit a crime.  That is what first strike is all about, isn't it little George.

If we have to act, we will take every precaution that is possible. We will plan carefully, we will act with the full power of the United States military, we will act with allies at our side and we will prevail.

- But you will have to give up your children.  Your sons and daughters will have to die.  But we will build a nice cemetery for them.

There is no easy or risk-free course of action. Some have argued we should wait - and that is an option. In my view, it is the riskiest of all options - because the longer we wait, the stronger and bolder Saddam Hussein will become.

-  Why don't we wait until he shoots down two of our military jets in a row.

 We could wait and hope that Saddam does not give weapons to terrorists, or develop a nuclear weapon to blackmail the world. 

- Blackmail the world?  Hell the world wants to start selling to Saddam. They want some of his oil money.

But I am convinced that is a hope against all evidence. As Americans, we want peace - we work and sacrifice for peace

- That is what Hitler said.  He wanted peace.

and there can be no peace if our security depends on the will and whims of a ruthless and aggressive dictator. 

- who can't even shoot down one single jet.

I am not willing to stake one American life on trusting Saddam Hussein.

- Who says we are.  We do not trust him. He is contained.

Failure to act would embolden other tyrants; allow terrorists access to new weapons and new resources; and make blackmail a permanent feature of world events.

- Where did you say that bin-Laden is hiding.

 The United Nations would betray the purpose of its founding and prove irrelevant to the problems of our time. And through its inaction, the United States would resign itself to a future of fear.

- Why am I not afraid.  I keep thinking about Saddam not being able to shoot down a single jet.

That is not the America I know. That is not the America I serve. We refuse to live in fear. 

- Well get someone to hold your hand little George.

This nation - in World War and in Cold War - has never permitted the brutal and lawless to set history's course. Now, as before, we will secure our nation, protect our freedom and help others to find freedom of their own.

- Yes and for the first time, we will become the first strike aggressors.

Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq it could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse for world security and for the people of Iraq.

- It will get worse for the people of Iraq when you start killing them like Israel kills Palestinians.

The lives of Iraqi citizens would improve dramatically if Saddam Hussein were no longer in power, just as the lives of Afghanistan's citizens improved after the Taliban. 

- Yes America knows best.  When everyone is like us, the world will be perfect, right little George.  Imagine the United States of the World.

The dictator of Iraq is a student of Stalin, using murder as a tool of terror and control within his own cabinet and within his own army and even within his own family. 

- And where is Stalin now little George, and how did he die?

On Saddam Hussein's orders, opponents have been decapitated, wives and mothers of political opponents have been systematically raped as a method of intimidation and political prisoners have been forced to watch their own children being tortured.

- this is the same pre-war rhetoric that all tyrants use.

America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights 

- but not health care

to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture.

- and it is Americas duty to make every nation a little American example.

 America is a friend to the people of Iraq. 

- and don't take it personal that we are going to kill a bunch of you.

Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. 

- I know what is best for you Iraqis.

When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women and children. 

- We will become you savior, your God, your salvation.

The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomans, Shi'a, Sunnis and others will be lifted. 

- And we will lift that oppression in Turkey and Syria and Iran as well.

The long captivity of Iraq will end and an era of new hope will begin. 

- American style hope that is.

Iraq is a land rich in culture, 

- rich in oil

resources and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time.

- Just like we have helped people in South Korea and Japan and Germany. 

If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors.

- But won't we have to invade Iran to make sure they do not attack our new protectorate Iraq?

Later this week the United States Congress will vote on this matter. I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America's military, if it proves necessary, to enforce U.N. Security Council demands. Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable. 

- But with me at the controls the chances are about 99%.

The resolution will tell the United Nations and all nations that America speaks with one voice and is determined to make the demands of the civilized world mean something. 

- Yes we are coming to your countries next.

Congress will also be sending a message to the dictator in Iraq: that his only choice is full compliance - and the time remaining for that choice is limited.

Members of Congress are nearing an historic vote, and I am confident they will fully consider the facts and their duties.

- If they give you the power, to act unilaterally, the world will plunge into chaos.

The attacks of Sept. 11 showed our country that vast oceans no longer protect us from danger. Before that tragic date, we had only hints of al-Qaida's plans and designs. Today in Iraq, we see a threat whose outlines are far more clearly defined - and whose consequences could be far more deadly. Saddam Hussein's actions have put us on notice - and there is no refuge from our responsibilities.

- Actually it was bin-Laden who put us on notice and who is still alive and well planning his next attack on America.

We did not ask for this present challenge, but we accept it. Like other generations of Americans, we will meet the responsibility of defending human liberty against violence and aggression. 

- You are not talking about defense but offense.  You are talking about first strikes, little George.

By our resolve, we will give strength to others. 

- We will show others our power.

By our courage, we will give hope to others. 

- The hope of making every one in the world a little American.

By our actions, we will secure the peace and lead the world to a better day.

- the legacy of war is always more war.

Thank you, and good night.

- God help us.

John WorldPeace
October 7,  2002

How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone (all races, all nations, all religions, both sexes) in our vision of Peace?

The WorldPeace Banner

The WorldPeace Sign

To the John WorldPeace Galleries Page

To the WorldPeace Peace Page