RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/2/2007 2:30:01 PM)

I agree, and that is why I am saying "if" he lied. Maybe he is torpedoing his own wife's campaign some?



Owner59 -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/2/2007 2:39:33 PM)

We shall see.

The election is 11 months away.

In politics,that`s a few lifetimes.

I`m still a fan of Paul.And Hillary isn`t there yet.

Anyone here care to predict how a Paul- Clinton race, would turn out?



luckydog1 -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/2/2007 4:04:23 PM)

Paul v Clinton?   Clinton would win in the largest landslide in History.....I would vote for her if those were the 2 choices.



OrionTheWolf -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/2/2007 4:10:17 PM)

I would vote for Paul because he wants to preside via constitutional guidelines, and bring the country back to what it was meant to be. His whacky ideas would be kept in check by congress.



luckydog1 -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/2/2007 4:12:31 PM)

Owner59?  you still have never answered the question I asked you many times.  Any other left winger feel free to answer. 

How many Iraqi's were killed under the sanction regiem enforced by Clinton?

It was certainly larger than zero, just from the bombings alone....



Real0ne -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 2:15:02 PM)



Yeh I just read he made another 5.somethign million!



samboct -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 5:14:23 PM)

Let me throw in one other data point- Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraqi invasion.  My sources (not published, private conversation with Congressman) said he voted for the war, following Hillary's lead- not Bush- figuring that Hillary would have the benefit of her hubby's counsel.  This would tend to cast doubt on Bill's claim that he would not have supported invading Iraq- although we don't know what was said in the Clinton household.  Hillary is clearly not in her husband's pocket.  Then again, I'm not sure I really believe anything in the press published about either Clinton or Bush-the hysteria whipped up about Monica clearly allowed Bush to make wild claims that were never verified- and have cost this country dearly.

Sam



farglebargle -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 6:57:55 PM)

Bush and his accessories committed fraud to obtain an Authorization Use of Military Force in Iraq, which is very different from, as characterized, "voted for the Iraqi Invasion".

Aside from the standards of Due Diligence, why would you hold the victim of the fraud responsible for the actions of the fraudsters?




OrionTheWolf -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 7:21:11 PM)

What does your statement have to do with Bill lying about opposing the war from the beginning?



samboct -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 7:24:07 PM)

Fargie

whatever you want to call it- we invaded a sovereign nation.

And yes- since theoretically Congress is responsible for the actions of the military in an invasion- I damn well do expect them to do their due diligence.  I knew that there were no WMD's there - if they'd done a bit more digging and decided to check on what Bush's pet defector was telling them- they might have figured it out too.  I'll quote Spiderman- "With great power, comes great responsibility."  I don't give Congress a pass for believing Bush's BS- I'm still not sure that the moron didn't believe it himself.  Given his ability to ignore science ("I don't believe in evolution.") I find it totally plausible that if somebody presented him evidence to the contrary- he'd chose not to believe it.  Hence- I'm not sure Bush committed a fraud- I still think that he's potentially just a moron- and being a moron isn't illegal- although it's certainly impeachable in this case.

Sam



farglebargle -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 7:30:17 PM)

I don't give Congress a pass, either, necessarily... But we cannot just ignore where the bulk of the responsibility exists... If Bush and his accomplices didn't intentionally defraud Congress, there would never have been a AUMF-Iraq, nor an Invasion.

Congress is, true, a bunch of suckers... But the *criminals* here is Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, et al. If not for their commission of a federal crime, we wouldn't be in the Iraq Quagmire today.

So we start by convening a Grand Jury, and getting Indictments against Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, et. al.. Then the Federal Marshals arrest them, and take them into custody.. Nothing but the finest in DUE PROCESS here. They get booked, photographed, fingerprinted, and dna-collected. THEN they get an arraignment. If they can make bail, they con go home, and await the Impeachment proceedings the very next day on C-SPAN.

Just thinking aloud here, about how the US can regain some measure of Honor and Integrity in the White House. I don't see it happening without a comprehensive and PUBLIC exercise of Due Process.




popeye1250 -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 9:33:50 PM)

Pathological liars lie when they don't have to.
Bush and Clinton have to be the worst presidents in the history of this country. Even worse than Buchanan.
If we could resurect *Nixon* it'd be a breath of fresh air after these two imbeciles.
We need to get rid of both the Bushes and Clintons!
That's what elections are for, a fresh start!



Estring -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/18/2007 11:38:49 PM)

Clinton stated when he was president that he supported regime change in Iraq.



farglebargle -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/19/2007 3:37:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Estring

Clinton stated when he was president that he supported regime change in Iraq.


There's a world of difference between "Supporting Regime Change" and committing criminal fraud to facilitate the war crime of aggression in the invasion and occupation of a Sovereign Nation.




mhawk -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/19/2007 6:28:53 AM)





i try not to defend any politicians,especailly ones from the early 90's on up.

not a shock really that Clinton is saying now he was against the war in Iraq and all that,funny but not funny in a way considering what he had a hand in during Desert Storm and Desert Sheild(yeah i'm bringing it up and don't care),after all this is one of the many things he was responsible for including making sure a little plan called "Don't Ask,Don't Tell,Don't Assume" reared it's head during his terms and also saw to that so called policy ruining good soldiers careers. and also counting in all the men,women,children,military and civilains wounded,killed and hunted down during his time in office  not too much unlike our current president..............................only real difference is we have yet to hear of Bush Jr getting a blow job.





Stephann -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/19/2007 8:21:02 AM)

Just business as usual in the Clinton camp.  Maybe bill forgot his VP invented the internet?  Or just assumes we're too stupid to punch the words "Bill Clinton Support Iraq" into Google?

Captain Obvious

On Tuesday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld continued Bush's attack, citing the words of Clinton and others from his administration as saying Saddam was a security threat to the United States and its allies. At a Pentagon news conference, Rumsfeld noted the Iraq Liberation Act that Congress passed in 1998 had said it should be U.S. government policy to support Saddam's removal from power. He noted that Clinton signed the act and ordered four days of bombing in December 1998.
USAToday

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world. "Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

CNN

•In April 2003 in New York, Clinton said "Saddam is gone and good riddance" and Bush shouldn't be criticized "for trying to act" on the belief that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. •In May 2003 at Tougaloo College in Jackson, Miss., he said that "I supported the president when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."
USAToday
"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
CNN

I think this morsel sums things up nicely, though.

"To prove Clinton’s past support, ABC News dug up a transcript from remarks he delivered during 2003 commencement at Tougaloo College in Jackson, Mississippi. "I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," he said."

Sounds like tacit support, no?
"Bill Clinton’s spokesperson attempted to explain the discrepancy by distinguishing between the authority to go to war -- which both Clintons supported -- and President Bush's decision to use that authority when he did."
Ohhhhh I get it.  He supported the president's right to make war... but not his actual act in going to war.
It's like if I give you 50$, but act angry if you spend it.  I'd actually feel bad for the man, if I didn't know he was lying through his teeth.

Captain Obvious



farglebargle -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/19/2007 8:42:01 AM)

"I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," he said."

I'm less interested in defending Clinton, than REFOCUSING ATTENTION on the real criminal actors in this fraud, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, et. al.

No WMD == No Support. Maybe Bill is pissed of at being lied to about the WMD, also? I would be.

People hate being used, and lied to. And they hate admitting that they were "foolish enough" to be taken in by con-men.




Stephann -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/19/2007 9:34:35 AM)

Fargle, I think the issue is that Bill believed, too, that Saddam had WMDs and potential ties to Al Qaeda.  It's part of why he ordered the strike against Iraq back in 98.  The real problem with Iraq, is there wasn't any good intelligence one way or the other regarding WMDs.  Saddam talked like he was guilty, acted like he was guilty, and spent the rest of his time in power trying to bluff the US, daring them to attack.  He believed (and I would have agreed with him, wrongly) that the US wouldn't unilaterally overthrow him, and he knew that the European Union wouldn't support a US attack.  Obviously he was wrong, risking (and breaking) his neck in the process.

History being what it is, Bush's sin isn't attacking Iraq.  Sam mentions sovereignty; what his post doesn't take into account that the only 'right' a nation has to sovereignty is what it can protect through military and political might.  Switzerland is one of the most politically powerful (thus safe) nations in the world (nobody wants to bomb their own banker, right?)  The US is the most militarily powerful nations in the world, with China on it's heels.  These nations don't and won't apologize for unilateral military actions, save for the risks they take in ruffling the feathers of other nation's interests.  By this token, China maintains Tibet, and if the US were to invade Mexico, there'd be global outrage.... but not a single nation would lift a finger to protect Mexico.  If nothing was made in Taiwan, it would have been swallowed up long ago by China.  If there had been no oil in Kuwait, it's a good bet that today it would be part of Iraq, and Saddam would still be alive and well.

Anyway, the point of this thread, originally, isn't that Bush & company are criminals.  The point is that Bill Clinton is trying to capitalize on credibility that he never had, and (probably correctly) is overestimating his nostalgia value.

Stephan



OrionTheWolf -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/19/2007 5:03:48 PM)

Fargle's point on any thread that mentions Iraq, is the same. He is very single minded about that. I on the other hand feel there is enough accountability to go around. I also feel there is a large difference between saying you changed your mind and rewriting what you actually did. When I first started this thread, I was not sure if he was lying but no retraction or explanation has come from Bill's side, so the only logical decision I can mae, with the evidence at hand, is that he lied.

Thanks for the extra links, I had read them but was going to leave this thread alone until it was resurrected.

Glad to see you back on the forums.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann


Anyway, the point of this thread, originally, isn't that Bush & company are criminals.  The point is that Bill Clinton is trying to capitalize on credibility that he never had, and (probably correctly) is overestimating his nostalgia value.

Stephan




farglebargle -> RE: Bill Clinton opposed war in Iraq from the beginning? (12/19/2007 5:06:36 PM)

quote:

The real problem with Iraq, is there wasn't any good intelligence one way or the other regarding WMDs.


Bullshit. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld et. al. INTENTIONALLY DISREGARDED the Intel the didn't like and didn't fit their plans for criminal fraud.

They INTENTIONALLY did not disclose the caveats required for the Intel they *did* present.

There was plenty of Good Intel. It was just ignored by the criminals and their marks.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0234375