Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Obama Critics Invent Absurd New Explanation For Iraq War

+4
ZVUGKTUBM
dumpcare
Joanimaroni
Hospital Bob
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Guest


Guest

Shameless.

WASHINGTON -- The argument for going to war in Iraq was clearly made. Over and over again, Saddam Hussein was said to be a turn-of-the-millennium Hitler, a madman bent on destroying America with his stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

Of course, that turned out to be false, but at the time, the justification was no mystery. The word "weapons" shows up 1,107 times in the Congressional Record during the period when the House and Senate were voting to grant President George W. Bush the authority to use force against Iraq. The more specific "weapons of mass [destruction or murder]" comes up 368 times.

Now, with Iraq on the verge of unraveling after the departure of U.S. forces, conservative pundits and some politicians who were wrong about Iraq then are declaiming a new reason for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, saying it was to liberate the Iraqis. The United States sacrificed 4,500 Americans in the name of freedom for the Iraqis, and President Barack Obama is blowing it, they say.

For instance, here's Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas):

JohnCornyn ✔ @JohnCornyn
Follow
Sad but true @benshapiro: It took nearly 4,500 American lives to win freedom for Iraq. It took one president to lose it.
7:26 AM - 13 Jun 2014


The word "freedom" shows up 118 times in the Congressional Record during the authorization votes, but it's generally in reference to securing freedom for America, and only occasionally for Iraqis. The word "liberate" shows up 12 times. And that's mostly in reference to Kuwait.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/16/iraq-obama-critics_n_5500337.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

BRDNH2O,

Anytime our politicians tell you that,  we have the proof that their wanting to "give freedom" to people is just empty rhetoric.
If our politicians were motivated by "giving freedom" to people,  they would have already invaded and occupied North Korea.  And would have especially done it when the North Korean dictators detonated a nuke.  Which by the way is the 2nd thing our politicians always run their mouths about.  They're saying they will bomb Iran if it even gets close to having a nuke.  But nobody gave a shit about North Korea detonating one AND THEN demonstrating they have a missile to carry the damn thing.

Don't believe anything they tell you.

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

Bob wrote:BRDNH2O,

Anytime our politicians tell you that,  we have the proof that their wanting to "give freedom" to people is just empty rhetoric.
If our politicians were motivated by "giving freedom" to people,  they would have already invaded and occupied North Korea.  And would have especially done it when the North Korean dictators detonated a nuke.  Which by the way is the 2nd thing our politicians always run their mouths about.  They're saying they will bomb Iran if it even gets close to having a nuke.  But nobody gave a shit about North Korea detonating one AND THEN demonstrating they have a missile to carry the damn thing.

Don't believe anything they tell you.  


Probably ......but no one wants to invade North Korea because of China.  China doesn't want the North Koreans jumping their borders and our borders are too far away.

dumpcare



Does anyone on this forum really believe that anyone living in a muslim nation for the past 100 years has truly had complete freedom? The only interest the U.S. has is oil and after all this time we should have wised up. We didn't win anything when Bush was President nor will we with Obama.

Guest


Guest

Good answers all around.

There is always a subtext to any use of our projected military might. It is almost never about humanitarianism. Occasionally we get it right.

However, we will happily help you rebuild your stuff we destroyed, except the antiquities.

Who needs that old pottery anyway? Clay jars containing ancient written texts? Foundations of ancient dwelling and such? Ground to powder under tank tracks.

They should have found all that stuff before we starting breaking things.

Some people get upset because their neighbor refuses to adhere to codes. Imagine if his neighborhood was invaded by armed Islamist troops?

Think he'd try to stand his ground?

We need to protect our people in Iraq until they can be safely extracted. Then allow the tribal factions to gerrymander and redraw the lines.

Like the GOP.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

...are declaiming a new reason for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, saying it was to liberate the Iraqis...

Poster Markle (our resident right-wing shill) will tell you this is EXACTLY why we went to war in Iraq. He will then tell us that George W. Bush's yes-man, General David Petraeus "won" the war, and that President Obama is causing us to "lose" it.

I personally think George W. Bush should be forced out of retirement and sent to Iraq to look for the mythical weapons of mass destruction that were never found. After all, we were told that we might see mushroom-clouds if we didn't go to war against Saddam. Maybe Bush can find some of those mobile biological weapons trucks that Colin Powell said were there, or those drones Saddam had that could spray nerve-gas.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

There is always a subtext to any use of our projected military might. It is almost never about humanitarianism.

I think the subtext in Iraq was the 145 billion barrels of recoverable light-sweet-crude that sits beneath the sands of Iraq.

Oil is the only thing of value that Iraq has to offer the world. There would have been no invasion if that resource was not there.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:...are declaiming a new reason for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, saying it was to liberate the Iraqis...

Poster Markle (our resident right-wing shill) will tell you this is EXACTLY why we went to war in Iraq. He will then tell us that George W. Bush's yes-man, General David Petraeus "won" the war, and that President Obama is causing us to "lose" it.

I personally think George W. Bush should be forced out of retirement and sent to Iraq to look for the mythical weapons of mass destruction that were never found. After all, we were told that we might see mushroom-clouds if we didn't go to war against Saddam. Maybe Bush can find some of those mobile biological weapons trucks that Colin Powell said were there, or those drones Saddam had that could spray nerve-gas.



Great idea....are going to send Clinton with him.  Maybe you should sent all personnel that viewed transfer trucks leaving Iraq and entering Syria before troops arrived in Iraq.

Are you denying the use of chemical  weapons by Saddam?

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

They're saying they will bomb Iran if it even gets close to having a nuke.  But nobody gave a shit about North Korea detonating one AND THEN demonstrating they have a missile to carry the damn thing.

You nailed it. Those pushing for an attack on Iran should instead be pushing for war against Kim Jong Un. They won't, though, because North Korea has a one-million man army and is lead by folks who are bat-shit crazy.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

BRDNH2O, Bob, ppaca, you really need to read more than The Nation and DailyKOS.

As you ALL well know, Saddam Hussein had over two years to move his chemical weapons and other WMD's out of Iraq. We are now moving WMD's out of Syria where they have been used on their own citizens.

We also secretly moved 550 metric tonnes of yellowcake from Iraq for storage in Canada.

Here, once again for your reference, are the Democrats who supported invading and toppling Saddam Hussein. This is TODAY, try as you like to change the calendar and to revise history. These are the FACTS.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
- President Clinton in 1998 “

[…], when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”
- President Clinton , Jan. 27, 1998 – State of the Union

"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 .

"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.

“Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqis nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.”

“Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.”

“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”
- President Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998

"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 Clinton Secretary of State

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed."
- Madeline Albright, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain 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 "

Update: September 8, 2005 - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser was sentenced to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them..

[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 .

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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 .

"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 .

"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 the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 .

"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.

"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 .

"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 but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"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 .

"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.

"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.

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“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 .

"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. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003" (Currently President Barack Hussein Obama’s Secretary of State)

I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."
- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Saddam is gone and good riddance," former President Bill Clinton said yesterday, but he urged President Bush to resist trying to get even with nations that opposed the war.

"There are German and French soldiers in Afghanistan today. Does the President want them to come home?" Clinton said at a Manhattan forum on corporate integrity.

He praised Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for their handling of the war, but said Bush should have waited longer before attacking for the "chance that either [Saddam Hussein] would have disarmed or . . . we would have had far more members of the Security Council with us."

Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.

"I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. . . . That is what I was always told," Clinton said.
- Former President Clinton Wednesday, April 16, 2003

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."
- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010


How has the war President Barack Hussein Obama said we SHOULD have been fighting going? How is the Middle East going now that President Obama is President? Oh, Afghanistan just crossed 2,330 American fatalities. Seventy percent of whom died since President Obama took office.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Is45Jwqizc

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Joanimaroni wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:...are declaiming a new reason for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, saying it was to liberate the Iraqis...

Poster Markle (our resident right-wing shill) will tell you this is EXACTLY why we went to war in Iraq. He will then tell us that George W. Bush's yes-man, General David Petraeus "won" the war, and that President Obama is causing us to "lose" it.

I personally think George W. Bush should be forced out of retirement and sent to Iraq to look for the mythical weapons of mass destruction that were never found. After all, we were told that we might see mushroom-clouds if we didn't go to war against Saddam. Maybe Bush can find some of those mobile biological weapons trucks that Colin Powell said were there, or those drones Saddam had that could spray nerve-gas.



Great idea....are going to send Clinton with him.  Maybe you should sent all personnel that viewed transfer trucks leaving Iraq and entering Syria before troops arrived in Iraq.

Are you denying the use of chemical  weapons by Saddam?

No, he definitely used them on his own people, years before our invasion. But in 2003 his arsenal of WMD was non-existent. Otherwise they would have been found.

The WMD talk was mostly just rhetoric used to cook-up excuses to justify the invasion. Regardless, Bush intended to invade Iraq from day one, with or without WMD. This was, of course, after he campaigned against engaging in "nation-building."

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

The Shill just reposted for the 100th time his cut-and-paste showing how so many politicians supported the attack on Iraq. I wonder how all of those people feel now? Boy were they played like fools.

What did Bush say? "Fool me once, shame on me...." Then he got tongue twisted and said something like this: "...Fool me can't fool me again...."
 Razz

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:...are declaiming a new reason for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, saying it was to liberate the Iraqis...

Poster Markle (our resident right-wing shill) will tell you this is EXACTLY why we went to war in Iraq. He will then tell us that George W. Bush's yes-man, General David Petraeus "won" the war, and that President Obama is causing us to "lose" it.

I personally think George W. Bush should be forced out of retirement and sent to Iraq to look for the mythical weapons of mass destruction that were never found. After all, we were told that we might see mushroom-clouds if we didn't go to war against Saddam. Maybe Bush can find some of those mobile biological weapons trucks that Colin Powell said were there, or those drones Saddam had that could spray nerve-gas.



Great idea....are going to send Clinton with him.  Maybe you should sent all personnel that viewed transfer trucks leaving Iraq and entering Syria before troops arrived in Iraq.

Are you denying the use of chemical  weapons by Saddam?

No, he definitely used them on his own people, years before our invasion. But in 2003 his arsenal of WMD was non-existent. Otherwise they would have been found.

The WMD talk was mostly just rhetoric used to cook-up excuses to justify the invasion. Regardless, Bush intended to invade Iraq from day one, with or without WMD. This was, of course, after he campaigned against engaging in "nation-building."


Moved not non existent. 

So, you think the idea of  WMD was some of Clinton's made up bullshit?

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:...are declaiming a new reason for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, saying it was to liberate the Iraqis...

Poster Markle (our resident right-wing shill) will tell you this is EXACTLY why we went to war in Iraq. He will then tell us that George W. Bush's yes-man, General David Petraeus "won" the war, and that President Obama is causing us to "lose" it.

I personally think George W. Bush should be forced out of retirement and sent to Iraq to look for the mythical weapons of mass destruction that were never found. After all, we were told that we might see mushroom-clouds if we didn't go to war against Saddam. Maybe Bush can find some of those mobile biological weapons trucks that Colin Powell said were there, or those drones Saddam had that could spray nerve-gas.

Have you always talked this stupid or is it something you learned?

If you want President George Walker Bush to go looking for WMD's, then you need all the Democrats I listed going as well along with the United Nations along with the leaders of all the Nations who supported the same thing.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Have you always talked this stupid or is it something you learned?

When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser

-Socrates

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

2seaoat



I think WMD was a legitimate concern for our troops stationed in Kuwait and Saudi. I think it is easy to discount this now when nothing was found. However, those who were laying out the evidence were slanting the same toward a credible threat. It is not the legitimate fear of the same, but the motivation of the slant, and the continued attempt by those same elements to slant the current story. The invasion of Iraq was a huge policy mistake. The leaving of Iraq was a huge policy success. We collectively share the blame for what we have done to the Iraqi people. It has been a shameful time in our history.

Guest


Guest

BRDNH2O, Bob, ppaca, you really need to read more than The Nation and DailyKOS.

Mr. Markle.

Don't try to tell me what I read when you don't know what you're talking about. It hasn't taken long to realize you lack even rudimentary ethics. A steady stream of lies, misinformation, obfuscation, and personal attacks.


Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

Rolling Eyes

Guest


Guest

Bob wrote:BRDNH2O,

Anytime our politicians tell you that,  we have the proof that their wanting to "give freedom" to people is just empty rhetoric.
If our politicians were motivated by "giving freedom" to people,  they would have already invaded and occupied North Korea.  And would have especially done it when the North Korean dictators detonated a nuke.  Which by the way is the 2nd thing our politicians always run their mouths about.  They're saying they will bomb Iran if it even gets close to having a nuke.  But nobody gave a shit about North Korea detonating one AND THEN demonstrating they have a missile to carry the damn thing.

Don't believe anything they tell you.  
 
 
What missile would that be which the NK have that can launch and successfully deliver a nuke??  They can't even hit containment areas that are set up for their own launches and nearly all of the ICBMs they have launched have been failures. Building a nuke is one thing, but putting it on a missile that can be shot into the atmosphere is another.

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:The Shill just reposted for the 100th time his cut-and-paste showing how so many politicians supported the attack on Iraq. I wonder how all of those people feel now? Boy were they played like fools.

What did Bush say? "Fool me once, shame on me...." Then he got tongue twisted and said something like this: "...Fool me can't fool me again...."
 Razz

Glad you like my post and its FACTUAL information. So long as you and your far left Progressives insist on your childish efforts to re-write history (LIE), I will continue to post the truth and the FACTS. If that upsets you, I suggest you try posting the TRUTH in the first place. I realize that is a novel idea for Progressives.

As for some of President Bush's gaffs and you childish need to point them out, I too can play that game. As you know, the MSM does an effective job of covering for your messiah.














I have many more if you would like them.

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:There is always a subtext to any use of our projected military might. It is almost never about humanitarianism.

I think the subtext in Iraq was the 145 billion barrels of recoverable light-sweet-crude that sits beneath the sands of Iraq.

Oil is the only thing of value that Iraq has to offer the world. There would have been no invasion if that resource was not there.

IF a frog had wings it wouldn't keep busting its behind every time it hit the ground too.

dumpcare



Markle wrote:BRDNH2O, Bob, ppaca, you really need to read more than The Nation and DailyKOS.

As you ALL well know, Saddam Hussein had over two years to move his chemical weapons and other WMD's out of Iraq.  We are now moving WMD's out of Syria where they have been used on their own citizens.

We also secretly moved 550 metric tonnes of yellowcake from Iraq for storage in Canada.

Here, once again for your reference, are the Democrats who supported invading and toppling Saddam Hussein.  This is TODAY, try as you like to change the calendar and to revise history.  These are the FACTS.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
- President Clinton in 1998 “

[…], when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”
- President Clinton , Jan. 27, 1998 – State of the Union

"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 .

"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.

“Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqis nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.”

“Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.”

“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”
- President Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998

"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 Clinton Secretary of State

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed."
- Madeline Albright, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain 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 "

Update: September 8, 2005 - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser was sentenced to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them..

[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 .

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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 .

"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 .

"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 the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 .

"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.

"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 .

"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 but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"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 .

"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.

"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.

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“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 .

"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. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003"  (Currently President Barack Hussein Obama’s Secretary of State)

I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."
- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Saddam is gone and good riddance," former President Bill Clinton said yesterday, but he urged President Bush to resist trying to get even with nations that opposed the war.

"There are German and French soldiers in Afghanistan today. Does the President want them to come home?" Clinton said at a Manhattan forum on corporate integrity.

He praised Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for their handling of the war, but said Bush should have waited longer before attacking for the "chance that either [Saddam Hussein] would have disarmed or . . . we would have had far more members of the Security Council with us."

Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.

"I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. . . . That is what I was always told," Clinton said.
-  Former President Clinton Wednesday, April 16, 2003

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."
- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010


How has the war President Barack Hussein Obama said we SHOULD have been fighting going?  How is the Middle East going now that President Obama is President?  Oh, Afghanistan just crossed 2,330 American fatalities.  Seventy percent of whom died since President Obama took office.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Is45Jwqizc

So they moved all that shit secretly? How the hell do you know about it then? They sit around all day at the home discussing these theory's? I don't have to read any present day publication's to know there has never been peace and never will be in our life time.

dumpcare



Yep, this ought to show them:

http://news.yahoo.com/more-us-troops-iraq-special-forces-considered-225039144--politics.html

Guest


Guest

Please go back and see what the democrats thought before and during going into the Iraq war.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5p-qIq32m8

AND THEN THEY VOTED FOR IT.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

A steady stream of lies, misinformation, obfuscation, and personal attacks.

That is his trademark, but we pick on him back plenty.....  
 Razz

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum