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.
Yet the dem Senate Majority Leader co-sponsored the bill to authorized the actions.
Yes greater support. Allow me to make it simpler:
In the Senate:
29 of democrats bought into Bush's plan. 21 did not. That makes for 58% of senate democrats said yes.
Compare that to 48 out of 49 republicans voting yes. That is 98%.
In the House:
82 of democrats voted yes while 176 opposed it. In other words, 32% of House democrats supported the measure.
Compare that to 215 out of 221 republicans voting yes. That is 97% voting yes.
In the Congress:
Total the above numbers up. Compute, and you have my previous argument.
What's wrong with that line of thinking is the timeline. Those who try to make this argument point to 1998 quotes of Democrats, as if there was no additional information from 1998 to 2003. Those who made those statements in 1998 no longer had the same view in later years.
"Those who made those statements in 1998 no longer had the same view in later years".
Really? I guess you chose to ignore my previous post because it proves how wrong you are.
"[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
"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 th! e 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..."
- 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
"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
"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
"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 ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
And let's not forget it was Clinton who signed the order for the regime change in Iraq.
Yes greater support. Allow me to make it simpler:
In the Senate:
29 of democrats bought into Bush's plan. 21 did not. That makes for 58% of senate democrats said yes.
Compare that to 48 out of 49 republicans voting yes. That is 98%.
In the House:
82 of democrats voted yes while 176 opposed it. In other words, 32% of House democrats supported the measure.
Compare that to 215 out of 221 republicans voting yes. That is 97% voting yes.
In the Congress:
Total the above numbers up. Compute, and you have my previous argument.
Your "argument'' doesn't matter.
IF Daschele didn't want the bill to pass he could have killed, like reid has done over 30 times during this Senate session alone. He didn't. He was the co-sponsor.
MY point, it was NOT Bush acting alone. It was a consensus of the Congress. Kinda like we hear from the left all the time about bi-partisanship.
We we do get it, many on the left like to act as if it didn't happen and put ALL the blame on Bush.
Your "argument'' doesn't matter.
IF Daschele didn't want the bill to pass he could have killed, like reid has done over 30 times during this Senate session alone. hH didn't. He was the co=sponsor.
MY point, it was NOT Bush acting alone. It was a consensus of the Congress. Kinda like we hear from the left all the time about bi-partisanship.
We we do get it, many on the left like to act as if it didn't happen and put ALL the blame on Bush.
Two questions:
1- Who had the intelligence?
2- Who was in-charge of making the decision?
3- Did you oppose Iraq War?
Republicans refuse to take responsibility for their mistakes. It wasn't just two years and it can't all be blamed on the Democrats. If is funny that the same party who never admits to any wrong doing and puts the good of the country second to making Barack Obama a one term president claims to be a party of personal responsibility. You can fool some people some times, but you can't fool all the people all the time - this whole thing is going to backfire on the GOP.
Two questions:
1- Who had the intelligence?
2- Who was in-charge of making the decision?
3- Did you oppose Iraq War?
Again you prove you are no Einstein.
"Two questions:
1- Who had the intelligence?
2- Who was in-charge of making the decision?
3- Did you oppose Iraq War?
Then you post 3 questions.
1. BOTH the congress AND the President had the intelligence. A fact many like to ignore.
2. Bush made the final decision with the AUTHORITY GIVEN HIM BY THE CONGRESS.
3. No, I did NOT oppose the war.
Republicans refuse to take responsibility for their mistakes. It wasn't just two years and it can't all be blamed on the Democrats. If is funny that the same party who never admits to any wrong doing and puts the good of the country second to making Barack Obama a one term president claims to be a party of personal responsibility. You can fool some people some times, but you can't fool all the people all the time - this whole thing is going to backfire on the GOP.
Democrats refuse to take any responsibility for their mistakes.
When was the last time you heard a dem apologize for making a mistake?
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Pelosi, , Holder, Obama comes to mind just to name a few
Correct. I use the past for comparison and investigation of causes and trends. You hated them. Hopefully, that is behind and our future exchanges will not be about dismissing the effects of the past, regardless of the time. Is that okay?
I never argued that the past bogus economy did not have an effect on todays. Hopefully we are past that.
Democrats refuse to take any responsibility for their mistakes.
When was the last time you heard a dem apologize for making a mistake?
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Pelosi, , Holder, Obama comes to mind just to name a few
I was referring to the people that vote for them and I have heard a lot of criticism from Democrats about Democrats, including the POTUS. Here we have a thread where someone is trying to blame everthing bad under GWB on Congress. This same group of people blame everything on BHO, not Congress. You can't have it both ways. If everything bad about GWB's presidency can be blamed on Congress, it is rather hypocritical to blame the current POTUS for everything and not place any responsibility on Congress now.
Gore certainly would have. Rockefeller who is on the intelligence committee would have. Both of their statements are on the list.
Quote:
2- Who was in-charge of making the decision?
Bush was in charge of making the decision and Congress in giving the O.K.
Quote:
3- Did you oppose Iraq War?
Personally I was not against deposing Saddam and his sons. In and out. That is not what happened and what did happen was a major failure that falls on the shoulders of GWB.
As an aside, I was not for the execution of Saddam.
I give Obama credit for in and out concerning Libya. Gaddafi should have been dealt with when he had flight 103 shot down.
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.
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.
