Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
"unprotected"? Where did you get that from? And NATO is not the coalition of the coereced. And since when did neocons care what the UN thinks.
Compare the lies and deceit that Cheney and folks pulled to invade Iraq, Clinton gets off light. Also, wasn't it the neocon driven GOP that bitched and moaned that Clinton was doing nothing in Iraq
Lets just look back an see what the facts are....Neocons bitching ?
"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 Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 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
"[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, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and 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.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
Well...looks like all the "bitching" was before Bush was even elected....
except for the last one...that was bitching to Pres. Bush....by NEODEM SOCIALISTS....Inconvenient facts rear their ugly heads
(despite maintaining Daddy Bush's embargo and no fly zones, and "strategic bombing"), and then when he did, they jumped all over him. Neocons can't have it both ways. So I suggest YOU think things through before you type...it helps.
Hey genius.....please explain how REPEATING your list that was already addressed in another post on this thread somehow changes the FACT that the neocon driven GOP was screaming bloody murder that Clinton was doing nothing about Hussein, yet they fought him tooth and nail on any legislation to stop terrorism. Here, once again for your education: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2045192
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
"unprotected"? Where did you get that from? And NATO is not the coalition of the coereced. And since when did neocons care what the UN thinks.
Compare the lies and deceit that Cheney and folks pulled to invade Iraq, Clinton gets off light. Also, wasn't it the neocon driven GOP that bitched and moaned that Clinton was doing nothing in Iraq
Lets just look back an see what the facts are....Neocons bitching ?
"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 Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 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
"[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, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and 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.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
Well...looks like all the "bitching" was before Bush was even elected....
except for the last one...that was bitching to Pres. Bush....by NEODEM SOCIALISTS....Inconvenient facts rear their ugly heads
(despite maintaining Daddy Bush's embargo and no fly zones, and "strategic bombing"), and then when he did, they jumped all over him. Neocons can't have it both ways. So I suggest YOU think things through before you type...it helps.
Hey genius.....please explain how REPEATING your list that was already addressed in another post on this thread somehow changes the FACT that the neocon driven GOP was screaming bloody murder that Clinton was doing nothing about Hussein, yet they fought him tooth and nail on any legislation to stop terrorism. Here, once again for your education: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2045192
For some reason these comments attached to the list never get added to RW rants on the topic.
