Remember the left’s “Bush lied, people died” mantra and protests?
Remember the main arguments – there was no connection between Iraq and Al-Qaeda and Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Remember what Dem/Lib leaders were saying before they were against it? Here are 18 quotes saying they were FOR the war. http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp
Could it have been Liberals that fabricated/manipulated intelligence and masterminded a scheme to fool/deceive us and other nations into believing we were justified going to war with Iraq? Are you sure it was all President George W. Bush’s idea?
I assume the majority against this war thought or said Oil/Texas Tea was the real impetus behind President Bush attacking Iraq. If my assumption is correct, and that reason was indeed right – I do believe that would have been a far more noble reason to go to war than this:
To set an administration up for failure after the next Presidential Election.
It could have been President Clinton’s Ace in his pocket for clinching the election for Hillary (depending how successful his defense of using the meaning of “is” was). Does anybody doubt the Clinton’s didn’t have it in them? Does anybody doubt they didn’t have a game plan to keep themselves at the helm?
February 17, 1998, President Clinton’s speech at the Pentagon about the unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals, here are some excerpts…
“We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century. They feed on the free flow of information and technology. They actually take advantage of the freer movement of people, information and ideas.
And they will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen.
There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us.
I want the American people to understand first the past how did this crisis come about.
And I want them to understand what we must do to protect the national interest, and indeed the interest of all freedom loving people in the world.
Remember, as a condition of the ceasefire after the Gulf War, the United Nations demanded not the United States the United Nations demanded, and Saddam Hussein agreed to declare within 15 days this is way back in 1991 within 15 days his nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them, to make a total declaration. That’s what he promised to do.
The United Nations set up a special commission of highly trained international experts called UNSCOM, to make sure that Iraq made good on that commitment. We had every good reason to insist that Iraq disarm. Saddam had built up a terrible arsenal, and he had used it not once, but many times, in a decade-long war with Iran, he used chemical weapons, against combatants, against civilians, against a foreign adversary, and even against his own people.
And during the Gulf War, Saddam launched Scuds against Saudi Arabia, Israel and Bahrain.
The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons.
Now, against that background, let us remember the past here. It is against that background that we have repeatedly and unambiguously made clear our preference for a diplomatic solution.
The inspection system works. The inspection system has worked in the face of lies, stonewalling, obstacle after obstacle after obstacle. The people who have done that work deserve the thanks of civilized people throughout the world.
It has worked. That is all we want. And if we can find a diplomatic way to do what has to be done, to do what he promised to do at the end of the Gulf War, to do what should have been done within 15 days of the agreement at the end of the Gulf War, if we can find a diplomatic way to do that, that is by far our preference.
But to be a genuine solution, and not simply one that glosses over the remaining problem, a diplomatic solution must include or meet a clear, immutable, reasonable, simple standard.
Iraq must agree and soon, to free, full, unfettered access to these sites anywhere in the country. There can be no dilution or diminishment of the integrity of the inspection system that UNSCOM has put in place.
But there is no better example, again I say, than the U.N. weapons inspection system itself. Yes, he has tried to thwart it in every conceivable way, but the discipline, determination, year-in year-out effort of these weapons inspectors is doing the job. And we seek to finish the job. Let there be no doubt, we are prepared to act.
If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraqs weapons of mass destruction program. We want to seriously reduce his capacity to threaten his neighbors.
I am quite confident, from the briefing I have just received from our military leaders, that we can achieve the objective and secure our vital strategic interests.”
You may prefer to ignore any possible wrongdoing by the Clinton’s or Democrats and pin the whole thing on Chalabi – an Iraqi or, ignore every alternate probability or possibility and happily keep blaming Bush. Here’s some information on Chalibi’s most recent cause.
Iraq’s Chalabi Takes Up New Cause
The Iraqi politician who allegedly fed faulty intelligence to help George W. Bush build the case to overthrow Hussein has…
Ahmed Chalabi’s pictured here on the left – http://twitpic.com/7ejnd6