If it was true in 1998, why isn't it true now?

[XMan]

Clinton Statement on Iraq

Enlighten me.

 

[Zebo]

Since when did people use Clinton as thier beacon for the truth?

 

[Zrom999]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
Since when did people use Clinton as thier beacon for the truth?

Most of the Bushites think that if you hate Bush you like Clinton. Just more of their flawed resoning.

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
Since when did people use Clinton as thier beacon for the truth?

The only thing I remember Clinton lying about was hummers and investment deals. I don't recall him ever lying about anything regarding national security.

 

[JellyBaby]

It's notable to me Clinton only mentioned the Iraqi people once. His reasoning was much the same as Bush's: make the Bad Guy live up to his agreements and eliminate the fear of a dangerous future.

However, I think it's safe to say Clinton was free from the shadow of ulterior motives, unlike Bush Inc, at least as far as I can determine.

 

[Tab]

Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

We are in Iraq because Bush said "go" and the troops went. Nobody made him. It was his choice.

 

[HappyPuppy]

I'll bet our troops in Iraq would much rather be Stateside drinking brewskis and getting hummers!

Uhhh. Nothing to do with the topic, but what the hell.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
I'll bet our troops in Iraq would much rather be Stateside drinking brewskis and getting hummers!

Uhhh. Nothing to do with the topic, but what the hell.

I thought the troops already had hummers?

 

[ViRGE]

Only the first 50. The rest only get 50% off.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

Classic brain washed American response.

 

[sMiLeYz]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Tabb
Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

Classic brain washed American response.

No kidding, Tabb must also suck at connect the dots too.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Tabb
Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

Classic brain washed American response.

Classic knee-jerk liberal response.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

omg, you know of a solid link between Saddam and terrorism??!? please tell us, the world must know

 

[OS]

man you republicans must be in one heck of a pinch to be citing slick willy these days.

 

[fluxquantum]

news from way back

clinton targets terrorism

 

[Nitemare]

Ask Scott Ritter...

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Tabb
Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

Classic brain washed American response.

Classic knee-jerk liberal response.

Well Clinton did fire a few cruise missiles at Osama.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: fluxquantum
news from way back

clinton targets terrorism

I can just imagine the same people here supporting the dolt right now were saying how it was a waste of money back then. LOL.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Tabb
Clinton was way too soft on terrorism IMHO. As for the reports, thats why we are in Iraq.

omg, you know of a solid link between Saddam and terrorism??!? please tell us, the world must know

Financially rewarding suicide bombers (families). How's that for a start?