Clinton Strikes Iraq...Lies About WMD!!!!!!!!!!!!

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Full Text

We began with this basic proposition - Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to develop nuclear arms, poison gas, biological weapons or the means to deliver them.

He has used such weapons before against soldiers and civilians, including his own people. We have no doubt that if left unchecked, he would do so again.

Saddam must not be prepared to defy the will - be permitted, excuse me, to defy the will of the international community. Without a firm response, he would have been emboldened to do that again and again.

Our objectives in this military action were clear: to degrade Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programme and related delivery systems as well as his capacity to attack his neighbours.


So long as Saddam remains in power, he will remain a threat to his people, his region and the world.

With our allies, we must pursue a strategy to contain him and to constrain his weapons of mass destruction programme while working toward the day Iraq has a government willing to live at peace with its people and with its neighbours.

Let me describe the elements of that strategy going forward.

First, we will maintain a strong military presence in the area, and we will remain ready to use it if Saddam tries to rebuild his weapons of mass destruction, strikes out at his neighbours, challenges allied aircraft or moves against the Kurds.

As you guys would say, "Man, what a "fvcking liar, eh?" ...but a good read nevertheless, aside from the WMD snafu.

 

[Tab]

Lets go Flog him! Who's with me! Lets have a protest to his house!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

We blew them(WMDs) up and if we didn't get them all - Saddam destroyed them so we wouldn't attack him again.

Too bad he didn't document them like and let us(UN) verify such - like he was supposed to.

CkG

 

[AnImuS]

No it cant be iraq never had wmd's, it cant be true!
Bush had the same access to intel as bill, except its false in bush's case.

 

[Corn]

JG, you really need to spice up your posts a little, here, try lacing your posts with the following: "disturbing", "thought provoking", "well respected", "senior official".

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
We blew them(WMDs) up and if we didn't get them all - Saddam destroyed them so we wouldn't attack him again.

Too bad he didn't document them like and let us(UN) verify such - like he was supposed to.

CkG

CAD,
When one refers to another administration's failure to justify a current administration's failure and the former actions are generally accepted as incomplete or ineffective, the latter's actions do not gain credibility or applause by like failure. The 'Assassin' theory suggests one find any way to put down one's rival or, in this case, comparison and there by appear better but, in reality one puts another nail in their own coffin and are no better they just carry bit more iron in their britches.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Corn
JG, you really need to spice up your posts a little, here, try lacing your posts with the following: "disturbing", "thought provoking", "well respected", "senior official".

Oh, and don't forget "___ is a disaster" to end your posts

You also could go off on tangents like China secrets, draft dodging, real estate deals, "silencing" the opposition....the list is endless.

Variety is the spice of life....or something like that

But FWIW - this argument has been used before - one of them will come in here sooner than later and start whining about "living in the past", "blowing them all up"(oops I did that for them), and any other excuse to save their precious hero of the 90s.

CkG

Edit - beaten to the punch by "one of them"

 

[sMiLeYz]

!!!!!!!!!!!!NEWSFLASH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IT AIN'T... Sunday, December 20, 1998 ANYMORE

alot has changed then... like we have a dumbass for president for one.