To the editor:

Consider the following.

The administration sent $114 million to Afghanistan prior to 9-11, even though we knew there was an alliance between the Taliban and al-Qaida. It’s been reported that the CIA warned the administration that al-Qaida had developed plans to hijack a plane on the East Coast of the United States, yet the administration ignored these warnings.

The president said Iraq’s refusal to cooperate with the United Nations gave the United States and its allies “the unilateral right to respond” with military force. When Russia and France refused to declare Iraq in “material breach,” the president decided to launch a military strike against Iraq anyway without the United Nations’ imprimatur. The president used the threat of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs as a justification for launching this pre-emptive strike against Iraq.

Prior to the attack, Iraq insisted that it had no weapons of mass destruction (WMD). After the attack, a National Security Council staffer admitted that the administration “generally did not know where Iraq was concealing its WMD programs.” The president launched a war of choice that Gen. Wesley Clark says was “technically illegal” because it lacked Security Council approval.

Does any of the above make you angry? If so, why were you silent? After all, the items above all occurred doing the Clinton-Gore administration. (The last item concerns Clinton’s use of military force in Kosovo. Unlike the 1991 and 2003 wars against Iraq, in which Bush 41 and Bush 43 sought congressional approval, the war in Kosovo was launched merely on Clinton’s executive authority.)

Kevin Groenhagen,

Lawrence