Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-19-2013, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,375,906 times
Reputation: 24780

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No. Bush believed the intel provided by Clinton, UNSCOM, and the UN as recently as November 2002. If any of that intel was faulty, Clinton, UNSCOM, and the UN need to answer for that.

Clinton in his own words as he signed the Iraq Liberation Act...

... it's amusing to see the extent that some will go to in order to deflect the blame for Iraq away from Bush.

It's obvious to all that you've bought your own BS. And I fully support your noble effort to convince the world that it's Clinton's fault.

Give this a try.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2013, 09:59 AM
 
10,876 posts, read 13,759,851 times
Reputation: 4896
Here's straight from the horse's mouth admitting Saddam never had WMD's


Bush says Iraq had no WMDs - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 10:19 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,557 posts, read 44,271,977 times
Reputation: 13504
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68 View Post
When did Clinton say they had WMD's?
Wow. Could you be any more uninformed?

"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

"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

"So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people." --President Bill Clinton, Dec.16, 1998. You can actually see and hear Clinton say that in the video I posted.

Note Clinton's specific mention of a "long-term strategy."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 10:24 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,038,972 times
Reputation: 8526
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post

I'll tivo it, and watch later. Maybe there's something in it that I don't know. Another good documentary is Bush's war. It was broadcast on PBS' Frontline.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 10:30 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,396 posts, read 9,409,504 times
Reputation: 4070
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Wow. Could you be any more uninformed?

"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

"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

"So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people." --President Bill Clinton, Dec.16, 1998. You can actually see and hear Clinton say that in the video I posted.

Note Clinton's specific mention of a "long-term strategy."
And the record shows that Clinton's actions must have been effective. No WMDs were ever found.

Has Iraq been "liberated" by Dubya's invasion?

That would be entirely up to the Iraqis to determine. And they aren't favorably inclined.

Public opinion on the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 10:45 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,557 posts, read 44,271,977 times
Reputation: 13504
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68 View Post
Here's straight from the horse's mouth admitting Saddam never had WMDs
At that time, they didn't.

THIS is why...

Obama's own Director of National Intelligence (General James R. Clapper):
Quote:
The director [Clapper] of a top American spy agency said Tuesday that he believed that material from Iraq's illicit weapons program had been transported into Syria and perhaps other countries as part of an effort by the Iraqis to disperse and destroy evidence immediately before the recent war.
THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ - WEAPONS SEARCH - Iraqis Removed Arms Material, U.S. Aide Says - NYTimes.com

And why would Iraq know to move its illicit weapons? Answer: The treasonous stunt Rockefeller pulled before the war that prompted Iraq to move the weapons:
Quote:
Rockefeller (D-WV): "I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq, that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11."
That was an EXACT quote. Transcript here:
Transcript: Sens. Roberts, Rockefeller
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,671,762 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
At that time, they didn't.

THIS is why...

Obama's own Director of National Intelligence (General James R. Clapper):THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ - WEAPONS SEARCH - Iraqis Removed Arms Material, U.S. Aide Says - NYTimes.com

And why would Iraq know to move its illicit weapons? Answer: The treasonous stunt Rockefeller pulled before the war that prompted Iraq to move the weapons:That was an EXACT quote. Transcript here:
Transcript: Sens. Roberts, Rockefeller
Let me ask you this: If Saddam had WMD and didn't use them against us during our invasion of Iraq, then when would he have used them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 10:53 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,557 posts, read 44,271,977 times
Reputation: 13504
Quote:
Originally Posted by skoro View Post
And the record shows that Clinton's actions must have been effective. No WMDs were ever found.
Already posted the fact that Democrat Sen. Rockefeller tipped off Iraq's ally Syria before the war, and Obama's own Director of National Intelligence said Iraq moved its weapons to Syria.

Furthermore, the goal was regime change, as clearly stated by Clinton's Iraq Liberation Act and self-professed long-term Iraq strategy.

If you wish to take issue with the Clinton Admin's and UNSCOM's intel and the UN Security Council's November 2002 resolution, please do so. You could also make the very valid point that Bush would have been a much better president if he ad acted under the tenet that Democrats and the UN cannot be trusted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 10:57 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,557 posts, read 44,271,977 times
Reputation: 13504
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Let me ask you this: If Saddam had WMD and didn't use them against us during our invasion
He didn't use them because they had already been moved to Syria. Rockefeller tipped off Iraq's ally before the invasion. He couldn't use them after the fact because his regime was toppled. Regime change was a direct goal of the Iraq Liberation Act Clinton signed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 11:02 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,396 posts, read 9,409,504 times
Reputation: 4070
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Already posted the fact that Democrat Sen. Rockefeller tipped off Iraq's ally Syria before the war, and Obama's own Director of National Intelligence said Iraq moved its weapons to Syria.

Furthermore, the goal was regime change, as clearly stated by Clinton's Iraq Liberation Act and self-professed long-term Iraq strategy.

If you wish to take issue with the Clinton Admin's and UNSCOM's intel and the UN Security Council's November 2002 resolution, please do so. You could also make the very valid point that Bush would have been a much better president if he ad acted under the tenet that Democrats and the UN cannot be trusted.
I'm not taking issue with anything.

You're taking issue with reality.

But that's your choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top