O'Neill: Iraq Plans Began at Start of Bush's Term

Fox News ^ | 01.10.04 | N.N.

[TaxRelief]

It makes sense. 9-11 probably delayed the Iraq plan. I wonder how many more Iraqi's died because of this delay? And I wonder if that extra time was used to move the WMD's out of Iraq?

[thesummerwind]

Leslie Stahl seems to get all these hit pieces on the Bush Administration. Last time around she tried to make Rummy look bad, and failed.

Thank God no one watches '60 Too Many Minutes' anymore. This is going to be a real hit piece.

CBS is a commie organization, plain and simple, and has been since the beginning of the network(s).

[J. L. Chamberlain]

Who discusses war plans with the treasury guy?

Uh, the "treasury guy" is a cabinet level official. You dolt.

J

[leadpenny]

Question for first segment of C-SPAN's Washington Journal:

Fair Criticism or Sour Grapes???

[Jimmy Valentine's brother]

Don't foget this war includes shutting off the money supply.

[mewzilla]

Interesting that this book is being published by Simon & Shyster, ain't it? Anyone know anything about the author?

[hershey]

Bingo.

[mewzilla]

Anyone who gets a chance might want to google the author, Ron Suskind. Some of the results make intersting reading.

[BigWaveBetty]

EPF104 11/02/98
TEXT: CLINTON ON SIGNING THE "IRAQ LIBERATION ACT OF 1998"
(Backing elements advocating different future for Iraq) (920)

Washington -- President Clinton October 31 signed into law H.R. 4655, the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998."

"This Act," the President said, "makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

"Let me be clear," Clinton said, "what the U.S. objectives are:

"The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

"The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq's history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else.

The President said that the United States "looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life."

Clnton noted that his Administration "has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership."

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, he said, "provides additional, discretionary authorities under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support efforts to eliminate Iraq's prohibited weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well."

Following is the White House text:

(begin text)

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
October 31, 1998

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998." This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are:

The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq's history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else.

The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council's efforts to keep the current regime's behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.

On October 21, 1998, I signed into law the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, which made $8 million available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition. This assistance is intended to help the democratic opposition unify, work together more effectively, and articulate the aspirations of the Iraqi people for a pluralistic, participa--tory political system that will include all of Iraq's diverse ethnic and religious groups. As required by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 1998 (Public Law 105-174), the Department of State submitted a report to the Congress on plans to establish a program to support the democratic opposition. My Administration, as required by that statute, has also begun to implement a program to compile information regarding allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Iraq's current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 provides additional, discretionary authorities
under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support efforts to eliminate Iraq's prohibited weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well.

Similarly, U.S. support must be attuned to what the opposition can effectively make use of as it develops over time. With those observations, I sign H.R. 4655 into law.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 31, 1998.

(end text)


http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/WF981102/epf104.htm

[SandRat]

Interesting! Makes me wonder why FDR didn't declare war on Japan when they sank our battleship( I think it was the Panay in the Yangtzee River in 1938)- that was an outright act of war and violated all treaties.

You got the ships name right but not the class. The Panay was a flat bottomed River Gunboat. I think she had only two or three 3 pound (about the size of a baseball) gun mounts (yes it was an old British Ship to boot).

If we had gone to war prior to Pearl Harbor, many lives would have been saved during WWII. The last figures I heard for American soldiers during WWII was 400,000 killed and 1,000,000 wounded.

That's a subject for great debate.

One thing is indisputable, the predecessors to A.N.S.W.E.R. (the American Communists fronting all kinds of anti-war, anti-military, isolationist ideas) were extremely active and strong. We were still in the midst of depression and these groups were clamoring the the $$$ should go to the "people," we have no need for war we have the "League of Nations," to settle disputes peaceably, if you have a military you have to use it, total disarmament. Does this sound familiar?
And they stayed that way until late summer of 1941 when Germany invaded Russia then the howls went in the other direction and FDR could not do enough for Stalin, charges went out that FDR was dragging his feet on helping Stalin, why wasn't FDR sending troops.

Come to think of it too bad OBL didn't attack Russia at the same time as he attacked NY then we would have had (dangerous as that is to say) Hollyweird backing and there would not be a peep out of A.N.S.W.E.R.!

[Bogey78O]

Well then if they discussed it at cabinet level meetings we'll ask the HUD guy.

[J. L. Chamberlain]

Membership of the National Security Council

The National Security Council is chaired by the President. Its regular attendees (both statutory and non-statutory) are the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the statutory military advisor to the Council, and the Director of Central Intelligence is the intelligence advisor. The Chief of Staff to the President, Counsel to the President, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy are invited to attend any NSC meeting. The Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget are invited to attend meetings pertaining to their responsibilities. The heads of other executive departments and agencies, as well as other senior officials, are invited to attend meetings of the NSC when appropriate.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/

Learn first, then post.

J

[Bogey78O]

Looking through your history you seem to (from recent posting habits) exist just to make snippy remarks. You seem to lack the ability to correct someone or suggest something without questioning their intelligence in some way.

[J. L. Chamberlain]

I'll submit that would be a valid criticism of me as of late. I've grown pretty tired of the BushBot faction on FR mindlessly posting utter nonsense and information without any factual basis.

In summertime I'd normally just go clean my pool to cool off but it's closed now so I just get too steamed from time to time. Sorry for being a prick. ;)

J

[Bogey78O]

No problem. I've been having the same problem with a friend when talking about the Bush immigration plan.

Take up skeet shooting. Nothing cools a man down like destroying stuff.