|
|
Post by saunterelle on Jun 10, 2008 15:51:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Jun 10, 2008 16:04:45 GMT -5
So what?
Who cares?
War's on!
Bush is not running!
Shall we try to win or shall we run away?
Be here now.
Get over it!
|
|
|
|
Post by mrroqout on Jun 10, 2008 16:09:08 GMT -5
Oh For Sure!
Totally explains away QUOTES LIKE :
"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" Billy Jeff Clinton FEBUARY 4th 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." Billy Jeff Clinton - FEB 17th 1998.
This one I really like alot :
"We 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 it's weapons of mass destruction PROGRAMS" - Letter to President Clinton SIGNED by : Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry and others OCT 9th 1998.
To which Billy dipped his cigar...
Yes I know I know, GWB's evil cabal "planted" those doctored intelligence documents..for Clinton to read......
Laughable.
YOU CANNOT EXPLAIN AWAY THE FACT THAT BILL CLINTONS ADMINISTRATION OPENLY CALLED THE MAN AND THE COUNTRY A THREAT TO WORLD PEACE.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Jun 10, 2008 16:13:35 GMT -5
Saunterelle, you must be one of those types who still cannot get over the fact that President Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury, so you're now trying to do anything you can to drag the current administration down into the same trough. Get over it, we're committed in Iraq and we have to deal with that. You've heard the joke about the difference between involvement and commitment, right?
This report will make headlines for a week or so, then will fade away. The real tell will be whether the Democrat Congress does anything about it. So far, Pelosi and Reid have not shown that they want any part of an impeachment process. So, you're out of luck.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Jun 10, 2008 16:15:57 GMT -5
Hey, jgaffney; I wanna hear the joke!
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Jun 10, 2008 16:22:21 GMT -5
Just as I though. Typical Republican dodging of the evidence. Your whole basis for action was incorrect plus your leaders LIED. Yes, this is PROOF THEY LIED to take us to war, where more than 4000 American soldiers have died. That doesn't bother you??
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Jun 10, 2008 16:24:46 GMT -5
No. Why would it?
I wanted us to invade somebody, & Iraq was the best choice.
WMD's?
I never cared.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrroqout on Jun 10, 2008 16:25:10 GMT -5
Uh wait.....
Typical blah blah blah dodging?
HUH your still dodging 10 year old quotes from your lord and saviour?
Explain them away...c'mon.
How is it that Bush got the SAME intelligence Billy "Blow the balls" had?
The good news for you is this those Liars are on their way out of office. For a whole new set of even BIGGER LIARS to come in for four years. As I think most people realize B.Hussein IS PURELY BUSINESS AS USUAL of the Democrat ilk...here come the BIG TAXES!
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Jun 10, 2008 16:27:41 GMT -5
I still want to hear the involvement/commitment joke.
Bet it's a doozy.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Jun 10, 2008 16:51:31 GMT -5
Oh, I am reading the entire document. Wow, some damning stuff in there.
I quote the report for all to read:
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-Qa'ida members. - Senator Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, October 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 5 years. He could have it earlier if he is able to obtain fissile materials on the outside market, which is possible-difficult but possible. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress that Saddam Hussein has been able to make in the developement of weapons of mass destruction. Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Congressional Record, October 10, 2002
Saddam Hussein is an evil man, a dictator who oppresses his people and flouts the mandate of the international community. While this behavior is reprehensible, it is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States. Senator Charels Schumer, Congressional Record, October 10, 2002
There is no question that Iraq possesses biological and chemical weapons and that he seeks to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. That is not in debate. Senator Christopher Dodd, Congressional Record, October 10, 2002
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 he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal. Senator John Edwards, Congressional Record, October 10, 2002
Almost no one disagrees with these basic facts: that Saddam hussein is a tyrant and a menace; that he has weapons of mass destruction and that he is doing everything in his power to get nuclear weapons; that he has supported terrorists; that he is a grave threat to the region, to vital allies like Israel, and to the United States; and that he is thwarting the will of the international community and undermining the United Nations' credibility. Senator John Edwards, Congressional Record, October 10, 2002
According to the CIA's report, all U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons. There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop nuclear weapons. The more difficult question to answer is when Iraq could actually achieve this goal. That depends on is its ability to acquire weapons-grade fissile material. If Iraq could acquire this material from abroad, the CIA estimates that it could have a nuclear weapon within 1 year. Senator John Kerry, October 9, 2002
When you look at what Saddam Hussein has at his disposal, in terms of chemical, biological, and perhaps even nuclear weapons, we cannot ignore the threat that he poses to the region and the fact that he has fomented terrorism throughout his reign. Senator Dick Durbin, December 21, 2001, Larry King Live.
Saddam's existing biological and chemcical weapons capabilities pose real threats to America today, tomorrow. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles taht could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facitilities in the Middle East. He could make these weapons available to many terrorist groups, third parties, which have contact with his government. Those groups, in turn, could bring those weapons into the United States and unleash a devastating attack against our citizens. I fear that greatly. Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Congressional Record, October 10, 2002
In addition, Iraq is developing unmanned aerial vehicles UAV's, capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents, which could threaten Iraq's neighbors as well as American forces in the Persian Gulf. Senator John Kerry, Congressional Record, October 9, 2002
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Jun 10, 2008 16:53:38 GMT -5
"HUH your still dodging 10 year old quotes from your lord and saviour?"
Clinton did not take our country to war using a fear mongering, propaganda campaign.
harpman, I'm curious what Iraqvet thinks of your comments. You show no respect for our soldiers who are doing the dirty work and dying by the thousands. If you wanted to invade a country so badly why weren't you in line at your local recruiter's office?
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Jun 10, 2008 16:55:59 GMT -5
Clinton did not take our country to war using a fear mongering, propaganda campaign. You are right there. He illegally attacked Serbia, a country who did not attack a single NATO or UN country, in violation of international law. Also, the 500,000 or 200,000 or even 100,000 dead ethnic albanians never materialized, so that was a lie. And they have found just as many dead Serbians in mass graves as Albanians. |
|
