Sarge Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_cavalierman Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Gotta hate those lying presidents. Link :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephGibbs Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Yep, many prominent democrats including Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and John Kerry in the late 90's and in the 21st century have commented on Saddams WMD's. What good are words if you are not willing to put action behind them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 27, 2008 Author Share Posted January 27, 2008 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction." - Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton. - (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | Source "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 | Source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephGibbs Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 wow, even Pelosi got in on the action Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_cavalierman Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Yep, many prominent democrats including Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and John Kerry in the late 90's and in the 21st century have commented on Saddams WMD's. What good are words if you are not willing to put action behind them? Good point, but when you decide to act at least have a plan that makes sense. It is also a good idea to be able to adjust your plan when the flaws are exposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 27, 2008 Author Share Posted January 27, 2008 Good point, but when you decide to act at least have a plan that makes sense. It is also a good idea to be able to adjust your plan when the flaws are exposed. That's where he ****ed up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_cavalierman Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Link A History Of Lies: WMD, Who Said What and When ? 05/30/03 Intelligence leaves no doubt that Iraq continues to possess and conceal lethal weapons George Bush, US President 18 March, 2003 Saddam's removal is necessary to eradicate the threat from his weapons of mass destruction Jack Straw, Foreign Secretary 2 April, 2003 Before people crow about the absence of weapons of mass destruction, I suggest they wait a bit Tony Blair 28 April, 2003 We are asked to accept Saddam decided to destroy those weapons. I say that such a claim is palpably absurd Tony Blair, Prime Minister 18 March, 2003 It is possible Iraqi leaders decided they would destroy them prior to the conflict Donald Rumsfeld, US Defense Secretary 28 May, 2003 Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney Speech to VFW National Convention August 26, 2002 Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. George "aWol" Bush Speech to UN General Assembly September 12, 2002 If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world. Ari Fleischer Press Briefing December 2, 2002 We know for a fact that there are weapons there. Ari Fleischer Press Briefing January 9, 2003 Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. George "aWol" Bush State of the Union Address January 28, 2003 We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more. Colin Powell Remarks to UN Security Council February 5, 2003 We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have. George "aWol" Bush Radio Address February 8, 2003 So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not. Colin Powell Remarks to UN Security Council March 7, 2003 Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. George "aWol" Bush Address to the Nation March 17, 2003 Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes. Ari Fleisher Press Briefing March 21, 2003 There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them. Gen. Tommy Franks Press Conference March 22, 2003 I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction. Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman Washington Post, p. A27 March 23, 2003 One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites. Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark Press Briefing March 22, 2003 We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. Donald Rumsfeld ABC Interview March 30, 2003 Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty. Neocon scholar Robert Kagan Washington Post op-ed April 9, 2003 I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found. Ari Fleischer Press Briefing April 10, 2003 We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them. George "aWol" Bush NBC Interview April 24, 2003 There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country. Donald Rumsfeld Press Briefing April 25, 2003 We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so. George "aWol" Bush Remarks to Reporters May 3, 2003 I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now. Colin Powell Remarks to Reporters May 4, 2003 We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country. Donald Rumsfeld Fox News Interview May 4, 2003 I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program. George "aWol" Bush Remarks to Reporters May 6, 2003 U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction. Condoleeza Rice Reuters Interview May 12, 2003 I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're still hidden. Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne Press Briefing May 13, 2003 Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found. Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps Interview with Reporters May 21, 2003 Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction. Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff NBC Today Show interview May 26, 2003 They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer. Donald Rumsfeld Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations May 27, 2003 For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on. Paul Wolfowitz Vanity Fair interview May 28, 2003 It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there. Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force Press Interview Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMK9973 Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 It's getting so old. This administration in a nut shell Even thought before us we were not (At war, in a reccession, running a deficit, have high gas prices, have a increase in unemployment, have a uptake in crime, have the highest goverement spending ever) it's not our fault. It's Clintons and the Democrats fault.... So much for Trumans "The Buck Stops here" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Cav...A simple question: Did Saddam's OWN generals and people believe he had WMD stockpiles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 they probably believed whatever could get them a ticket out of Iraq with a new identity and bank account in a Western city. Regardless, the leaders ****ed up, it goes to show you how much of the crap we hear is rhetoric instead of substance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_cavalierman Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Cav...A simple question:Did Saddam's OWN generals and people believe he had WMD stockpiles? A simple answer: I don't know But if I had to offer a guess... The Iraqi people likely had no clue either way except for the Khurds that Saddam actually used poison on. As far as his generals it was probably a need to know basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Clinton believed Saddam had WMD's. He wanted to get the weapons inspectors back in. Bush believed Saddam had WMD's. He wanted to invade the country, install a new government, and spend billions of dollars trying to defend it and rebuild it. The difference isn't what they believed; it's what they wanted to do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0108/490972.html Piro, a Lebanese-American who speaks Arabic, debriefed Saddam after he was found hiding in an underground hideout near his home city north of Baghdad in December 2003, nine months after the U.S. invasion. Piro said Saddam also said that he wanted to keep up the illusion that he had the program in part because he thought it would deter a likely Iranian invasion. "For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that (faking having the weapons) would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq," Piro told Scott Pelley of "60 Minutes." Piro added that Saddam had the intention of restarting an Iraqi weapons program at the time, and had engineers available for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_cavalierman Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 It's getting so old.This administration in a nut shell Even thought before us we were not (At war, in a reccession, running a deficit, have high gas prices, have a increase in unemployment, have a uptake in crime, have the highest goverement spending ever) it's not our fault. It's Clintons and the Democrats fault.... So much for Trumans "The Buck Stops here" Republicans never take blame or accountability for their ****-ups....not when the clintons or carter are around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USS Redskins Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Clinton believed Saddam had WMD's. He wanted to get the weapons inspectors back in.Bush believed Saddam had WMD's. He wanted to invade the country, install a new government, and spend billions of dollars trying to defend it and rebuild it. The difference isn't what they believed; it's what they wanted to do about it. I would agree 100% but Clinton didnt have to deal with this on 9/12, when no one knew what could happen next. Would this dictator, who had his ass kicked very publicly 10 years before give a terrorist something that could cause more damage than a 767? On that date anything was and could be possible. He made a choice to do something about it - handled the post war badly but at least he did something about a perceived threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 I would agree 100% but Clinton didnt have to deal with this on 9/12, when no one knew what could happen next. Would this dictator, who had his ass kicked very publicly 10 years before give a terrorist something that could cause more damage than a 767? On that date anything was and could be possible.He made a choice to do something about it - handled the post war badly but at least he did something about a perceived threat. Yeah, the complaint is really that the *something* that Bush decided to do was poorly led and badly mismanaged....I think we would have been better off if Bush had decided to do *something* else (perhaps given the weapons inspectors more time to do their job), or maybe if *someone* else had been in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Well, probably the difference is that none of the quoted folks invaded Iraq over any of these assumptions. Perhaps, the thought was, "If we can deal with the Soviets over the duration of a Cold War, then we can deal with Saddam," who, of course, was one of our former allies. And of course we knew about his WMDs, which he did have one at time. Especially when they were used during Iran - Iraq conflict, in which Saddam had our support. The problem is, when it comes to the pre-war efforts to persuade the American public that an invasion was necessary, creating ties between Saddam, 9-11 (which some folks still believe), and Al-Qaida, and creating an impression that Saddam was an immediate threat. It has been demonstrated that the administration willfully deceived the American public and perhaps some lawmakers as well. Soon after the 9-11 attack, administration members, and specifically VP Cheney, wanted connections to be found between Saddam and 9-11. As the Downing Street documents said, "fix the facts." Complete responsibility cannot be shouldered by President Bush, as far as the inaccuracy of what was believed, but as the commander-in-chief, it is his position to mostly certain share some of it. Especially if the President and the administration were only interested in forging ahead with an invasion, no matter the conclusions of WMD investigators or the intelligence community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_cavalierman Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 He made a choice to do something about it - handled the post war badly but at least he did something about a perceived threat. Bush had my support in Afghanistan He lost my support and the vast majority of the planet with his decision to invade Iraq. There is a big difference between doing something and doing the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 27, 2008 Author Share Posted January 27, 2008 The problem is, when it comes to the pre-war efforts to persuade the American public that an invasion was necessary, creating ties between Saddam, 9-11 (which some folks still believe), and Al-Qaida, and creating an impression that Saddam was an immediate threat. It has been demonstrated that the administration willfully deceived the American public and perhaps some lawmakers as well. Bill Klinton deceived the AMerican public about Iraq? And all those other Dems lied about him having WMD's too? Say it ain't so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_cavalierman Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Bill Klinton deceived the AMerican public about Iraq? And all those other Dems lied about him having WMD's too?Say it ain't so Here we go again...."The Dems did it to" is their best defense.... You can allocate responsibility but never accountability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephGibbs Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Republicans never take blame or accountability for their ****-ups....not when the clintons or carter are around. Actually Republicans are taking the blame (i.e. 2006 national elections). All of our leaders should be held accountable, especially if they have spoken out on this issue. However, Democrats are the ones who want to scapegoat the war on Republicans and act as if they have never said anything in regards to pre war rhetoric, which as Sarge nicely pointed out, is just not the case. Again, if words (especially the strong, intimidating, point blank language some of the Democrats used about Saddam) are not backed up with some type of credible action (millitary if need be) then they are just words and do not hold water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephGibbs Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Here we go again...."The Dems did it to" is their best defense.... You can allocate responsibility but never accountability. I just don't think that is the case. It is not that "The Dems did it to". It is that some Democrats act and speak as if they did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoc4454 Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 was he wearing any pants behind that podium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 27, 2008 Author Share Posted January 27, 2008 was he wearing any pants behind that podium? Hillary was wearing them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.