|
WASHINGTON -- In one of the most
brutal critiques of the administration's policy toward Iraq by a member of
Congress, East Bay Rep. Pete Stark said President Bush would be
responsible for "an act of terror" by launching a massive bombing campaign
to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
"I think unleashing 3,000 smart bombs
against the city of Baghdad in the first several days of the war . . . to
me, if those were unleashed against the San Francisco Bay Area, I would
call that an act of extreme terrorism," said Stark, a Democrat from
Fremont.
A White House spokeswoman said Stark
and other members of Congress are entitled to their views.
"Others will judge them and decide
whether or not they agree with them," spokeswoman Claire Buchan said.
But she added: "The president has
made it very clear that it is Saddam Hussein's choice not to take asylum
or not to disarm, and that is the choice he is making. The president's
interests are the interests of peace for the American people, the Iraqi
people and the region."
Stark's razor-tipped rhetoric was
mostly an exception on a day in which many Bay Area lawmakers who oppose
the war expressed resignation about the coming war.
"I'm glum. I've been glum all day,"
said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma. "I'm so saddened and disappointed that
we have failed with diplomacy and in so doing are risking the lives of
American troops and Iraqi citizens."
While anti-war members of
California's delegation said they will continue to speak out against the
policy, many already are softening their rhetoric and stressing their
support for U.S. troops in the Persian Gulf.
Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, said
he still believes Bush is making "a dangerous decision." But now, he said
Congress should show unity in backing America's soldiers.
"It's our young people who will be in
jeopardy. They are the ones who are on the firing line," Miller said. "Now
that the decision has been made to go to war, they are entitled to our
full support."
Even the few Bay Area lawmakers to
back Bush's policy are spending less time making the case for war and more
time airing their concerns about the potential loss of life.
Rep. Tom Lantos, D-San Mateo, one of
the Democrats most strongly in support of the president's policy, said his
thoughts were about military men and women, particularly the National
Guard and reservists "who sacrifice so much for their country and receive
too little in return for their families."
Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, the lone
Republican in the Bay Area delegation, praised Bush for making a
"difficult and courageous decision."
"Anytime the decision is made to send
our troops in harm's way, it is never easy," Pombo said.
Stark, a peace activist in the 1960s
and a 30-year veteran in Congress, is known for his sharp and sometimes
careless tongue. He told the Oakland Tribune Monday that if the president
initiates the war, "it's blood on Bush's hands."
His latest criticism is based on
published reports that U.S. forces plan to fire as many as 3,000 laser-
and satellite-guided missiles on Iraq in the first days of a military
campaign.
"You can't send in 3,000 bombs
without some of them going awry, in spite of the military's claims about
accuracy," Stark said in an interview Tuesday with The Chronicle. "If they
get two-thirds accuracy that means that 1,000 bombs will explode (off
target) inside a city of 6 million people. To me, that's a terrorist act."
Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, said
Stark's comments reflect the "deep, emotional sentiments" of many anti-war
lawmakers.
"I agree this isn't the right action
to take," Honda said. "There will be collateral damage, and there will be
civilians hurt."
Also Tuesday, Republican leaders were
sharply critical of Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle for saying in a
speech Monday that he was "saddened that this president failed so
miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war."
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.,
said Daschle's remarks "may not give comfort to our adversaries, but they
come mighty close."
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer
said the comments were inconsistent with Daschle's previous remarks about
avoiding "politicizing the rhetoric" about the war.
Rallying to Daschle's defense, House
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, repeated what Republican
Sen. Robert Taft of Ohio said two weeks after the Japanese attacked Pearl
Harbor: "Criticism in time of war is essential to the maintenance of any
kind of democratic government."
"In expressing his views, Tom Daschle
is being patriotic," Pelosi said. "The Republican leaders are being
partisan."
�2003 San Francisco
Chronicle | 