Skip to comments.Dems lied to get us into war!
Posted on 11/16/2005 2:26:28 PM PST by rightalien
A funny thing happened on the way to democracy in Iraq. Democrats who voted against our entry into the first Gulf War, voted for the war resolution this time around. Why? They were certain that WMDs would be uncovered and President Bush would be hailed for making the world safer, removing a brutal dictator from power, and establishing a democracy in a vital part of the world. They couldnt allow Bush to get all the credit! After all, they are the ones who made the case for war during the Clinton administration.
In truth, they made the case dishonestly and only to remove Monicagate from the news! These doves at all costs turned into hawks in a magicians trick of deflection and deception. Dont look at Clintons foibles, look at this evil guy in Iraq!
Phoenix morning talker, Bruce Jacobs (KFYI 960 AM), has started a campaign this week of Dems lied to get us into war and he is outraged. By quoting the Dems in their own words, its hard to argue that we were indeed mislead into war. Here are a few choice samples that Jacobs has compiled to lend credence to his thesis:
Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks 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.Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983. Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
Bill Clinton, who now says invading Iraq was a mistake, had said this:
If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraqs weapons of mass destruction program. President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
Jacobs complete list of Words of Mass Destruction is here.
Now suddenly the President, Rumsfeld, the GOP start to quote the big mouths' own words to bring to light their lies. Where have they been for THREE YEARS????????? How much damage has been done by their silence!
Dean says that the GOP controls the White House, Senate and House, therefore they don't have to be responsible for anything.
With the end of Ramadan on January 29 and Saddam still failing to comply with his commitment to the U.N. to disarm, Clinton officials resumed public efforts to make the case on the threat posed by Saddam Hussein.
Secretary Albright flew to the Middle East to drum up support for possible war.21 "Saddam Hussein, armed with chemical and biological weapons, is a threat to the international community," she told journalists in Bahrain.22
A few days later, on February 7, Clinton, joined by Prime Minister Blair, devoted his Saturday radio address to Iraq. Noting the two were speaking from the same room where FDR and Churchill "charted our path victory in World War II," Clinton told Americans that we now face "a new nexus of threats, none more dangerous than chemical and biological weapons, and the terrorists, criminals and outlaw states that seek to acquire them." He warned that "Iraq continues to conceal chemical and biological weapon[s]," "has the "missiles that can deliver them" and "has the capacity to quickly restart production of these weapons."23
How fast Saddam could "restart production" was discussed in a 10-page U.S. Government white paper on "Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction" released on February 13.24 "In the absence of UNSCOM inspectors," the report stated, "Iraq could restart limited mustard agent production with[in] a few weeks, full-production of sarin within a few months, and pre-Gulf war production levels - including VX - within two or three years." It had a chart listing how many were killed by Saddam's chemical weapons in the 1980s. It noted that although inspections severely curtailed Iraq's wmd programs, Saddam "is actively trying to retain what remains of his wmd programs while wearing down the will of the Security Council to maintain sanctions." But, "even a small residual force of operational missiles armed with biological or chemical warheads would pose a serious threat to neighboring countries and US military forces in the region."25
It detailed the biological and chemical agents and munitions for which Iraq had not accounted. It stated that Iraq "provided no hard evidence to support claims that it destroyed all of its BW agents and munitions in 1991" and "has not supplied adequate evidence to support its claim that it destroyed all of its CW agents and munitions."26
The white paper also discussed Iraqi nuclear activity.
Under the White Paper's "nuclear weapons" section, it observed: "Baghdad's interest in acquiring nuclear or developing nuclear weapons has not diminished"; "we have concerns that scientists may be pursuing theoretical nuclear research that would reduce the time required to produce a weapon should Iraq acquire sufficient fissile material"; "Iraq continues to withhold significant information about enrichment techniques, foreign procurement, weapons design, and the role of Iraq's security and intelligence services in obtaining external assistance and coordinating postwar concealment."27
On February 17, President Clinton spoke on the steps of the Pentagon. The president declared that the great danger confronting the U.S. and its allies was the "threat Iraq poses now-a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed." Before the Gulf War of 1991, he noted, "Saddam had built up a terrible arsenal, and he had used it. Not once, but many times in a decade-long war with Iran, he used chemical weapons against combatants, against civilians, against a foreign adversary and even against his own people."28
Clinton furthered explained that:
Iraq "admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability, notably, 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs. And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production. . . .
"Over the past few months, as [the weapons inspectors] have come closer and closer to rooting out Iraq's remaining nuclear capacity, Saddam has undertaken yet another gambit to thwart their ambitions by imposing debilitating conditions on the inspectors and declaring key sites which have still not been inspected off limits . . . .
"It is obvious that there is an attempt here, based on the whole history of this operation since 1991, to protect whatever remains of his capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction, the missiles to deliver them, and the feed stocks necessary to produce them. The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons. . . .
"Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal. . . .
Words cannot describe how happy I am to see the adminisration FINALLY fight back. This is only being done to satisfy MoveOn.Org. These dems know Bush didnt lie. I wasnt keen on going into Iraq but the democrats went right along with Bush and now it is their obligation to get behind the war effort and support our troops till the job is finished. The best way to end the war quickly is to get behind the effort 100% because right now we are there.
Oooop's, sorry didn't mean to post the whole thing , that's why I put the link there.
Moderator please adjust as necessary if you think you need to.
The Demonrats' only defense is that they did not use "the faulty intelligence" that they unanimously endorsed to lead us into war. Lame, so lame.Speaking of faulty intelligence, wasn't it Senator Frank Church and the Demonrats who (as Mike Savage says) "deballed" our intelligence establishment in the mid 70s?
I don’t thing anyone realizes how calculating the Dems are. They knew the information given to them was false. They only played along so that after we went to war they could say they were all intentionally fed bad intelligence and lied to, by the Bush Administration. Now they can claim and they would have kept from war they had not been lied to.
I think you give them too much credit. They all had the same intel. Most of the Dems didn't even take the time to read it
Thank you. Mr. Estrada.
Well, I agree with Dean...the democrats are irresponsible...and therefore it's a good thing that the GOP controls the White House, Senate and House...too bad so many Republicans are cowardly about utilizing their control to the fullest.
KOSOVO! Remember the HUGE LIE that 100,000 had been slaughtered, and then we find out it was made up.