quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

This is mostly bullshit(no offense directed toward you Firm)...The bullshit lies in finding an analogy between Libya and Iraq.

Lets look at the differences .

1)Iraq was an invasion....the stated goal being the fictitious WMD....the actual goal being regime change and nation building(a charge specifically denied at the time)
2)Libya is the imposition of a NFZ....was there much dissent over the 12 years in which a NFZ was imposed after Gulf war 1.
3) Iraq...no populist uprising.....Libya a populist uprising
4) no call from the nonexistent popular uprising for international relief.....Libya's populist rebel forces begged for international help in the face of unrelenting air strikes by Qaddafi's air force...
5)Absence of lies to the American people...to the international community.
Do I need to continue?

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

This is mostly bullshit(no offense directed toward you Firm)...The bullshit lies in finding an analogy between Libya and Iraq.

Lets look at the differences .

1)Iraq was an invasion....the stated goal being the fictitious WMD....the actual goal being regime change and nation building(a charge specifically denied at the time)
2)Libya is the imposition of a NFZ....was there much dissent over the 12 years in which a NFZ was imposed after Gulf war 1.
3) Iraq...no populist uprising.....Libya a populist uprising
4) no call from the nonexistent popular uprising for international relief.....Libya's populist rebel forces begged for international help in the face of unrelenting air strikes by Qaddafi's air force...
5)Absence of lies to the American people...to the international community.
Do I need to continue?

mike,

I wasn't specifically and only trying to draw parallels between Obama's actions in Libya, and Bush's in Iraq.  I probably could, but truthfully I've been so busy otherwise that I've not done much of a deep analysis of the situation, and do not really have an opinion one way or the other about the US actions in Libya.

And, I'm not sure that your examples above actually address what Sanity is saying or pointing out.  I suspect that if I were interested enough to take your examples on, I would likely be able to shed a different light on them.

I will say that there are plenty of other examples of Obama=Bush that I don't really need to even list them, do I?

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


How many times has it been pointed out to you that President Clinton repeatedly warned the world of the grave dangers presented by Saddam Hussein, and that the majority of Dems in the Senate were on record since the Clinton administration warning of the dangers...

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

oh...oh,I know that one...can I answer it?

quote:


Transcript President Clinton explains Iraq strike

December 16, 1998


Earlier today, I ordered Americas armed forces to strikemilitary and security targets in Iraq. They are joined byBritish forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqs nuclear,chemical and biological weapons programs and its militarycapacity to threaten its neighbors.Their purpose is to protect the national interest of theUnited States, and indeed the interests of people throughout theMiddle East and around the world.Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighborsor the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biologicalweapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimousrecommendation of my national security team, to use force inIraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would nolonger cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectorscalled UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozensof countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraqscapability to retain, create and use weapons of massdestruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuildthat capability.

The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago atthe end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroyits arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.The international community had good reason to setthis requirement. Other countries possess weapons of massdestruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is onebig difference He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly.Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during adecadelong war. Not only against soldiers, but againstcivilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, SaudiArabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy,but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians inNorthern Iraq.

The international community had little doubt then, and I haveno doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will usethese terrible weapons again.

The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM asIraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with theinspectors. On occasion, weve had to threaten military force,and Saddam has backed down.

Faced with Saddams latest act of defiance in late October,we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed byoverwhelming military force in the region. The UN SecurityCouncil voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddams actions and todemand that he immediately come into compliance.


More

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

And exactly how many times did Clinton invade Iraq? Got even a rough estimate, for that matter?

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I think I understand the issue here...You just have no clue what an actual invasion is .
Google could help you out if you are interested in correcting this omission of knowledge.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

But, that is what Panda asked, Sanity. And what you copied to your post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

that was a nice edit too
completely denies what was originally done

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Two men occupying the same office,dealing with much of the same problems....I'm sure any reasonably intelligent person (gratuitous insult redacted) can make such a case.....however,any other reasonably intelligent person can make a counter case.....proves nothing at all.