Wrong, Mr. President.

George W. Bush has finally said something about the 377 tons of missing explosives from al Qaqaa:

"Now the senator is making wild charges about missing explosives when his top foreign policy adviser admits, quote, 'we do not know the facts.' Think about that. The senator's denigrating the action of our troops and commanders in the field without knowing the facts," Bush said in Lancaster County, Pa.

There are several things wrong with this statement. First, the charges Kerry is making are not "wild". They have been reported by the NY Times, as well as other newspapers. Those reports quote Iraqi and UN officials as claiming that the explosives disappeared after the US invasion. Iraqi officials are on the record as saying that "it is impossible that these materials could have been taken from this site before the regime's fall." For all I know, tomorrow the Department of Defense might release satellite photos of large convoys of trucks leaving al Qaqaa before the invasion. But based on the evidence now available to us, the claim that we allowed al Qaqaa to be looted, despite clear warnings not to, is not "wild" at all.

Second, it is simply false to say that Kerry is "denigrating the action of our troops and commanders in the field". Here's what Kerry actually said:

"George W. Bush who talks tough and brags about making America safer has once again failed to deliver. After being warned about the danger of major stockpiles of explosives in Iraq, this administration failed to guard those stockpiles – where nearly 380 tons of highly explosive weapons were kept. Today we learned that these explosives are missing, unaccounted for and could be in the hands of terrorists. (...)

In May of this year, the administration was warned that terrorists may be helping themselves to ‘the greatest explosives bonanza in history.’ And now we know that our country and our troops are less safe because this president failed to do the basics. This is one of the great blunders of the Bush policy in Iraq.

The unbelievable incompetence of this president and his administration has put our troops at risk. George W. Bush has failed the essential test of any commander in chief to keep America safe.

Every step of the way this administration has miscalculated – miscalculated about how many troops we need. Secretary Rumsfeld cavalierly dismissed the danger of looting -- and now we know the impact.

“Make no mistake: our troops are the best-trained and best-led forces in the world, and they have been doing their job honorably and bravely. The problem is the Commander-in-Chief has not being doing his." (Emphases added.)

Nowhere in his response does John Kerry blame the troops. On the contrary, he goes out of his way to praise them. He blames President Bush and his administration. I cannot see how he could possibly have been clearer about this. For President Bush to interpret criticism of him as criticism of our troops, and by extension to cast his attempt to avoid responsibility for his administration's mistakes as an attempt to stick up for the men and women he has sent into harm's way, is dishonest.

Bush did get one thing right, though. He said that "a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief." I completely agree. And here I can only echo the response of my favorite Presidential candidate:

"Retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark ... said Bush's words amounted to "a very compelling and thoughtful argument for why he should not be reelected."

"It was Bush who "jumped to conclusions about any connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11," Clark said in a statement released by the Kerry campaign. "He jumped to conclusions about weapons of mass destruction. He jumped to conclusions about the mission being accomplished. He jumped to conclusions about how we had enough troops on the ground to win the peace. And because he jumped to conclusions, terrorists and insurgents in Iraq may very well have their hands on powerful explosives to attack our troops, we are stuck in Iraq without a plan to win the peace, and Americans are less safe both at home and abroad."

Clark concluded: "By doing all these things, he broke faith with our men and women in uniform. He has let them down. George W. Bush is unfit to be our commander in chief.""

Comments

[Jesurgislac]

It's really unbelievable.

Does Bush honestly think people will believe anything he says - even when he invents claims that Kerry criticized the troops when Kerry praised them?

Or is no one actually telling Bush what Kerry says, just giving him a list of talking points to recite?

I do believe that the famous "bulge" is probably just a tailoring problem - but when Bush comes out with stuff like this, I'd like to believe it's an alien blob sitting between his shoulderblades controlling his mind.

[hilzoy]

If he keeps up like this, I'm going to have to entertain the theory that the bulge is actually Voldemort.

[CharleyCarp]

"Does Bush honestly think people will believe anything he says - even when he invents claims . . ."

Yes. And he's right.

[hilzoy]

Just for the record (since we're getting down to the wire and my sense of humor, at least, is under strain): even if I did think that it was Voldemort under the shirt, I would still accept Bush as my President if he wins, just like I did last time.

[Sebastian Holsclaw]

"George W. Bush who talks tough and brags about making America safer has once again failed to deliver. After being warned about the danger of major stockpiles of explosives in Iraq, this administration failed to guard those stockpiles – where nearly 380 tons of highly explosive weapons were kept. Today we learned that these explosives are missing, unaccounted for and could be in the hands of terrorists."

This implies that the stockpiles were still there when we took over. As has been noted, there is considerable doubt about that--in fact I would suggest that the current weight of the evidence is well in favor of the idea that the stockpiles were NOT there when the US took over. See Belmont Club, or Michael Totten quoting of all things a CBS report.

Which is why the charges appear 'wild'.

"Make no mistake: our troops are the best-trained and best-led forces in the world, and they have been doing their job honorably and bravely. The problem is the Commander-in-Chief has not being doing his."

You say: "Nowhere in his response does John Kerry blame the troops. On the contrary, he goes out of his way to praise them. He blames President Bush and his administration."

This is a straddle. Bush was not personally involved in securing the site, that was the job of the 3rd Infantry Division and later the 101st Airborne. Contending that they were not competent to find (which they did not) or secure (which they could not because they did not find such explosives) is of course an attack on the troops. You can't just blame the Bush administration, the 3rd Infantry and the 101st were there.

Considering the number of trucks which would have been needed to transport the 377 tons, it is ridiculous to assume that the explosives could have been taken undetected while the roads were closed (which is to say right after the invasion). A more likely explanation (or at the very least equally likely explanation) is that the explosives were taken during the extended run-up to the war. Such run-up was greatly extended by the international community process which Kerry is so fond of.

[Gromit]

Let me get this straight: Bush and you, Sebastian, are passing the buck to the troops, and in doing so are accusing Kerry of denigrating our men in uniform and straddling? Am I misunderstanding something here?

[Gromit]

To be clear, I mean passing the buck from Bush to the troops, not that you ever had or deserved the buck, Sebastian.