Posted on 11/03/2005 3:00:30 PM PST by MikeA
As I have often said (and resaid) the inexcusable element in the Democrats' attacks on their President in the midst of a war is that they are betraying a war they authorized in the first place. In the wake of Harry Reid's unhinged accusations the Republican National Committee has posted a collection of statements by Democratic Party leaders reminding us why we went to war.
DEM OFFICIALS HAVE WARNED ABOUT WMDs IN IRAQ FOR YEARS
Former President Bill Clinton:
President Clinton: "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." (President Clinton, Remarks To Joint Chiefs Of Staff And Pentagon Staff, 2 /17/98)
President Clinton: "Earlier Today I Ordered America's Armed Forces To Strike Military And Security Targets In Iraq... Their Mission Is To Attack Iraq's Nuclear, Chemical And Biological Weapons Programs And Its Military Capacity To Threaten Its Neighbors ..." ("Text Of Clinton Statement On Iraq Attack," Agence France Presse, 12/17/98)
Former Vice President Al Gore:
Gore: "You Know, In 1991, I Was One Of Those Who Put Partisanship Completely Aside And Supported President Bush At That Time In Launching The Gulf War. And In That War, We Saw How Saddam Had Threatened His Neighbors And Was Trying To Get Nuclear Weapons, Chemical Weapons, And Biological Weapons. And We're Not Going To Allow Him To Succeed." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 12/16/98)
Gore: "[I]f You Allow Someone Like Saddam Hussein To Get Nuclear Weapons, Ballistic Missiles, Chemical Weapons, Biological Weapons, How Many People Is He Going To Kill With Such Weapons? He's Already Demonstrated A Willingness To Use These Weapons ..." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 12/16/98)
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY):
Sen. Clinton: "I Voted For The Iraqi Resolution. I Consider The Prospect Of A Nuclear-Armed Saddam Hussein Who Can Threaten Not Only His Neighbors, But The Stability Of The Region And The World, A Very Serious Threat To The United States." (Senator Hillary Clinton [D-NY], Press Conference, January 22, 2003)
Sen. Clinton: "In The Four Years Since The Inspectors, Intelligence Reports Show That Saddam Hussein Has Worked To Rebuild His Chemical And Biological Weapons Stock, His Missile Delivery Capability, And His Nuclear Program. ... It Is Clear, However, That If Left Unchecked, Saddam Hussein Will Continue To Increase His Capability To Wage Biological And Chemical Warfare And Will Keep Trying To Develop Nuclear Weapons." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. S10288)
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA):
Sen. Kerry: "The Crisis Is Even More Threatening By Virtue Of The Fact That Iraq Has Developed A Chemical Weapons Capability, And Is Pursuing A Nuclear Weapons Development Program." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/2/90, p. S14332)
Sen. Kerry: "If You Don't Believe ... Saddam Hussein Is A Threat With Nuclear Weapons, Then You Shouldn't Vote For Me." (Ronald Brownstein, "On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd," Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)
Former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC):
Sen. Edwards: "Serving On The Intelligence Committee And Seeing Day After Day, Week After Week, Briefings On Saddam's Weapons Of Mass Destruction And His Plans On Using Those Weapons, He Cannot Be Allowed To Have Nuclear Weapons, It's Just That Simple. The Whole World Changes If Saddam Ever Has Nuclear Weapons." (MSNBC's "Buchanan And Press," 1/7/03)
Sen. Edwards: "The Question Is Whether We're Going To Let This Man [Saddam] Who's Been Developing Weapons Of Mass Destruction Continue To Develop Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Get Nuclear Capability, And Get To The Place Where If We're Going To Stop Him, If He Invades A Country Around Him, It'll Cost Millions Of Lives As Opposed To Thousands Of Lives." (MSNBC's "Hardball," 2/6/03)
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV):
Reid: "The Problem Is Not Nuclear Testing; It Is Nuclear Weapons ... The Number Of Third World Countries With Nuclear Capabilities Seems To Grow Daily. Saddam Hussein's Near Success With Developing A Nuclear Weapon Should Be An Eye-Opener For Us All." (Sen. Harry Reid, Congressional Record, 8/3/92, p. S11188)
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN):
Bayh: "In My Opinion - And I Do, As You Know, I'm Fairly Hawkish On Iraq. I'm Inclined To Support Going In There And Dealing With Saddam. But I Think That Case Needs To Be Made On A Separate Basis - His Possession Of Biological And Chemical Weapons, His Desire To Get Nuclear Weapons, His Proven Track Record Of Attacking His Neighbors And Others." (CNN's "Late Edition," 8/4/02)
Bayh: "The Question Is, Do You Want Saddam Hussein Having Chemical Weapons, Having Biological Weapons, Possibly One Day Having A Nuclear Weapon? Do You Want To Have To Deal With That? And If The Answer Is No, Then What Do You Do About It And When Do You Do Something About It?" (CNN's "Live Event/Special," 12/1/01)
Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE):
Biden: "First Of All, We Don't Know Exactly What He Has. ... We Know He Continues To Attempt To Gain Access To Additional Capability, Including Nuclear Capability. There Is A Real Debate How Far Off That Is, Whether It's A Matter Of Years Or Whether It's A Matter Of Less Than That, And So There's Much We Don't Know." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 8/4/02)
Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM):
Richardson: "The Threat Of Nuclear Proliferation Is One Of The Big Challenges That We Have Now, Especially By States That Have Nuclear Weapons, Outlaw States Like Iraq." (ABC's "Good Morning America," 5/29/98)
Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL):
Sen. Graham: "I Don't Know If I've Seen All The Evidence, But I've Seen Enough To Be Satisfied That There Has Been A Continuing Effort By Saddam Hussein Since The End Of The Gulf War, Particularly Since 1998, To Re-Establish And Enhance Iraq's Capacity Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Chemical, Biological And Nuclear." (CBS' "Face The Nation," 12/8/02)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL):
Durbin: "One Of The Most Compelling Threats We In This Country Face Today Is The Proliferation Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction. Threat Assessments Regularly Warn Us Of The Possibility That North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Or Some Other Nation May Acquire Or Develop Nuclear Weapons." (Sen. Dick Durbin, Congressional Record, 9/30/99, p. S11673)
Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI):
Feingold: "With Regard To Iraq, I Agree, Iraq Presents A Genuine Threat, Especially In The Form Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Chemical, Biological, And Potentially Nuclear Weapons. I Agree That Saddam Hussein Is Exceptionally Dangerous And Brutal, If Not Uniquely So, As The President Argues." (Sen. Russell Feingold [D-WI], Congressional Record, 10/9/05, p. S10147)
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL):
Nelson: "And My Own Personal View Is, I Think Saddam Has Chemical And Biological Weapons, And I Expect That He Is Trying To Develop A Nuclear Weapon. So At Some Point, We Might Have To Act Precipitously." (CNN's "Late Edition," 8/25/02)
Nelson: "Well, I Believe He Has Chemical And Biological Weapons. I Think He's Trying To Develop Nuclear Weapons. And The Fact That He Might Use Those Is A Considerable Threat To Us." (CNBC, "Tim Russert," 9/14/02)
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV):
Sen. Byrd: "The Last U.N. Weapons Inspectors Left Iraq In October Of 1998. We Are Confident That Saddam Hussein Retains Some Stockpiles Of Chemical And Biological Weapons, And That He Has Since Embarked On A Crash Course To Build Up His Chemical And Biological Warfare Capabilities. Intelligence Reports Indicate That He Is Seeking Nuclear Weapons ..." ("Threats And Responses," The New York Times, 10/4/02)
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):
Pelosi: "Others Have Talked About This Threat That Is Posed By Saddam Hussein. Yes, He Has Chemical Weapons, He Has Biological Weapons, He Is Trying To Get Nuclear Weapons." (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Congressional Record, 10/10/02, p. H7777)
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA):
Harman: "I Certainly Think [Saddam's] Developing Nuclear Capability, Which, Fortunately, The Israelis Set Back 20 Years Ago With Their Preemptive Attack, Which, In Hindsight, Looks Pretty Darn Good." (Fox News' "The Big Story," 8/27/02)
Former Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-MO):
"Gephardt Said He's Seen 'A Large Body Of Intelligence Information Over A Long Time That He Is Working On And Has Weapons Of Mass Destruction. Before 1991, He Was Close To Having A Nuclear Device. Now, You'll Get A Debate About Whether It's One Year Away Or Five Or Six." (Morton M. Kondracke, "Gephardt Pushes Consensus Action Against Iraq Threat," Roll Call, 9/23/02)
Former Secretary Of State Madeline Albright:
Madeline Albright: "Iraq Is A Long Way From [Here], But What Happens There Matters A Great Deal Here, For The Risk That The Leaders Of A Rogue State Will Use Nuclear, Chemical Or Biological Weapons Against Us Or Our Allies Is The Greatest Security Threat We Face, And It Is A Threat Against Which We Must And Will Stand Firm." ("Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright, Secretary Of Defense William Cohen And National Security Adviser Sandy Berger Participate In Town Hall Meeting," Federal News Service, 2/18/98)
The fact is, every top Democrat from Clinton on down said Saddam had WMD, when Bush was making the case that Saddam was a threat that needed to be reckoned with Democrats saw the same intelligence as Bush did and drew the same conclusion, that Saddam was undoubtedly armed with WMD.
And every Western intelligence agency including that of a socialist British Prime Minister, France, Germany and even Russia all thought Saddam had WMD. Putin even reiterated recently on "60 Minutes" that Russia was sure Saddam had WMD. So the "WMD" wasn't a lie. It was consensus.
So the only question that remains is what Saddam did with his WMD. Democrats and their seditious allies in the media aren't willing to ask that question, preferring instead to throw rocks at the president's integrity rather than asking why everyone thought he had them and yet they were gone when we got there.
And by the way, the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation on pre-war intelligence determined there was NO INTENTIONAL EFFORT TO DECEIVE NOR MANIPULATION OF THE INTELLIGENCE. So the Dems. can put away the simple-minded and slanderous "Bush lied" crap because at least 3 separate investigations have proven he did not. And the quotes provided above lend further evidence that Bush did not lie, but believed as everyone else did that Saddam had WMD.
Demoncrats are liars.
Keep on file for "Bush Lied" email chains I get.
bump
Good idea!
Forward to all your Email friends and enemies....Jake
Good compilation of old news the MSM ignores.
No. Each day, go to the DU site and post these. If we got a concerted effort, we can keep them tongue tied for a few seconds, maybe...
None of that matters a whit. The only things that matters are the lies. They must be repeated over and over.
The message is intended for the rabid semilliterate mass who barely knows what happened today much less several years ago.
The DNC mounts a humongous propaganda effort and Dingy Harry reads his script as directed.
Yep and not one of those D's had the nuts to do dick about it. If it was President Gore in 2001, God forbid, the WMD question might be more clear imho because instead of disappearing they'd be in use against American assets abroad, Israel and here CONUS at the hands of alQaeda
I have no idea. I have never looked at it, much less posted there. But, I'm certainly willing to get banned from it...
It doesn't matter. The Bush-haters will continue to say Bush Lied, no matter what. Their word-artisans will pour it on.
"Yep and not one of those D's had the nuts to do dick about it."
You bring up an interesting point. The boilerplate DemoZombie reply to all these quotes showing Clinton and others were raising a warning voice about Saddam and WMD before Bush ever did is: "Well Clinton didn't start a war in Iraq, Bush did!" My standard reply to that is "So Clinton saw the self-same threat in Saddam's Iraq as Bush did yet Bush was the only one of the two willing to take bold action to end Saddam's threat and in this equation Clinton is the one who looks good in your warped mind?" They just usually reply with a blank stare.
"Harry Reid is involved in the Mormon cult,they believe that satan and Jesus were brothers and that God had relations with Mary to Make Jesus.
In other words, He is a typical evil liberal!"
I don't think that bigoted comment has any place here. Reid's religion has nothing to do with his politics, and most Mormons are strong conservatives. Utah gave Bush the most support by percentage of any other state. I hope you will re-think your hatefulness, and your misrepresentation of Mormon doctrines.
Don't forget UN resolution 1441. The UN in it's "infinite wisdom" knew there was threat but also failed to act. That'll get you more blank stares.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.