NYT Editorial: The threat posed by Iraq and its arsenal is too serious for diplomacy

The New York Times Archives [NO TEXT LINK] | Feb 18, 1998 | Editorial

[neodad]

That's like saying "the sky is blue" He reminds me of my ex-wife. Nothing she said was true.

[CyberAnt]

Exactly!

[logician2u]

Yep, the mainstream media were opposed to the Iraq war from the start, just as Rush and a bunch of others have said all along.

[MizSterious]

Great ping, thank you. (Woulda read it sooner, but had spyware problems.)

[MizSterious]

But it was good "spam." Wish there were some way to get Hannity or someone (anyone) to read snippets of these on the air.

[Gucho]

thanks for the ping...

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Well, now we have this just in:

Iran's New President Declares Worldwide 'Islamic Revolution'

[MizSterious]

Well, that's depressing. But not a surprise, really, given his role in the Iran hostage situation. (Thanks, Jimmah Carter, now look what you did.)

[Peach]

Thank you, MizSterious :-)

Sometimes I just wish that ONE Republican would stand up in a press conference and read a few of the things that we've written about.

The Iraqi War Resolution of 2002 signed by Democrats specifically states that AQ was in Iraq.

Yet just today I've heard Dean and Pelosi and Clark tell us that AQ was NOT in Iraq prior to the war.

Don't reporters do ANY homework anymore or are they mere stenographers for the DNC?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

And there is this thread:

AP Photo shows Iran’s new President as 1979 US hostage-taker

[MizSterious]

And those that do won't point it out when one of those blowhards coughs up another lie. Infuriating.

[MizSterious]

That should be an indictment of the peanuthead. This is what he's brought on us. And now this terrorist, who wants a world-wide jihad for allah, has nukes. It's been my theory for years now that it was Carter's mishandling of the hostage situation on his watch that gave birth to terrorism as we now know it.

[SERKIT]

Since Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the United States and other countries have enforced the U.N. Security Council resolutions to contain Iraq from attacking its neighbors and from using weapons of mass destruction. That containment policy continues.

Let's not forget the risks our aviators took during patrol sorties of the 'no-fly zone' from the conclusion of the 1991 war, up to Operation Iraqi Freedom and all the shots SH's military took at our fliers (SAM's and small-arms fire).

These were continuous acts of aggression and clearly in violation of the UN resolutions. In other words, Saddam Hussein was NOT in 'his box'!

[Peach]

Just look at the first paragraph I posted below from the Resolution:

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq; Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

http://www.yourcongress.com/ViewArticle.asp?article_id=2686


The first paragraph alone clearly shows that Democrats KNEW that AQ was in Iraq pre-war.

[Marine_Uncle]

Well Ernest,
I should be clear to the world who rules the roost in Persia.
The 50 Mullahs are now having a field day. They got their prefered boy in. So sad for the good folks of Iran, that are caught in the middle. Especially those that have grown to hate the cult of Islam as they have access to western learning.
Perhaps if GWB made a public announcment that it was decided we shall destroy all their defense and communication grids, their airforce, and all ground to air defenses, then fly wave after wave of KC10 and other type refueling tankers over Tehran and dump huge amounts of pig fats, oils, entrails etc., over the city for two or three weeks in endless waves................the 50 Mullahs and all their government croonies would flee. Then GWB could announce that whenever any of them are spotted by an in house observer in some new spot the same shit would be dropped on them.
Perhaps after a few months of doing this Iran would be ready for a free election to disband Islam, terrorism, and create a new constitution and democractic government.
I realize one hell of a lot of hogs will be have to be used, but it sure beats wasting a lot of expensive ordnance on these creeps. Plus an added benifit is where ever the crap is dumped, they no longer can use the mosques etc.. Perhaps they will replace prayer calls with American hard rock music. And take up drinking beer. Then their souls will slowly start to be cleansed from 14 centuries of horrible abuse.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

ROFL!

IOWA has lots of hogs I've heard.

[Marine_Uncle]

"IOWA has lots of hogs I've heard."

Bring em on! Can you imagine our mid west farmers contributing ten percent of their hogs to such an effort.

Seriously. Iran's elected president, Mooooosab A, don't have his name memorized and probably won't any time soon, may just be saying stuff to convince his gang that he is going to continue on the path Iran decided on when they formed the revolution to end the Shia of Iran's reign. Nothing he said takes the form of a new edict etc.. Just perhaps a warning to those that have tried to change their rulers, that they had better fall in line. No more western ways. Back to 7th century. Since he in essence worked for the past twenty plus years for the Mullahs, we should just see a continuation of Islamic rule as par. With a little leaning harder to abolish any gained freedoms some might had perceived as having developed. Guess time will tell on this bird.

[DCPatriot]

NYT...sons-a-b*tches!

[Lazamataz]

O, what a difference a President makes.....

[PhilipFreneau]

LOL. In 1998, when Clinton was considering an attack on Saddam to rid him of his WMD's, every liberal was spouting the same talking points as this NYT editorial. Quotes have been posted on FR several times from Kennedy, Hagel, Lahey, Dashle, Kerry, and many other prominent liberals who warned of Saddam and his WMD's.