Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill Clinton: If not for the U.S. invasion, none of what’s in Iraq right now would be happening
Hotair ^ | 05/26/2014 | AllahPundit

Posted on 06/26/2014 5:24:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

Via Mediaite, an easy lay-up here for a guy who (a) warned the world about Saddam’s WMD threat more than once as president, (b) cautiously declined to take a firm position against the war at the time, and (c) is of course married to someone who cast a vote in the Senate to invade.

But never mind that. This is an interesting counterfactual: What would have happened to Iraq during the Arab Spring and Syrian uprising if Saddam had endured? Clinton implicitly assumes that ISIS advancing on Baghdad is the worst possible outcome of the past 10 years, which is the smart play politically when your wife’s desperate to appease the anti-war left en route to her party’s nomination. Is it true, though? Assume that Egyptians had toppled Mubarak in 2011 with Saddam watching from Baghdad. At a minimum, he would have cracked down hard on Iraq’s Shiites to suppress an insurrection before it caught fire, and if you know anything about the 1991 Shiite uprising, you know how much blood a Saddam “crackdown” could draw. Meanwhile, maybe the Sunnis across the border in Syria, inspired by Mubarak’s ouster, still would have revolted against Assad. What would have been Saddam’s move then? He could have come to Assad’s rescue, one Baathist defending another from a rebellion in the name of protecting autocracy, but his relations with Assad were poor so he may well have stood pat — in which case Iran might have moved to defend Assad, fearing that the Sunnis in Syria would overrun the Shiite regime just as Saddam was crushing the Shiites in Iraq.

That would have put Iranian forces on two of Iraq’s borders, an encirclement Saddam couldn’t tolerate. In which case, maybe he’d throw in with Syria’s Sunnis in the name of bleeding Iran. He wasn’t above cooperating with terrorists when it served his interests; in fact, one of his chief henchmen is rumored to be working with ISIS right now against Maliki. Would a long proxy war in Syria, with Saddam and Sunni jihadis on one side and Iran, Hezbollah, and Assad on the other, have been better or worse for the region? The virtue of it, such as it is, is that it would have kept a gigantic mess of degenerates fighting with each other instead of thinking about America. What the death toll would have looked like, though, heaven only knows. That’s the thing about the Middle East — there’s really no such thing as a good outcome. That’s the point Clinton should have made vis-a-vis the hubris of the U.S. invasion, not raising a counterfactual that relies on Saddam Hussein as some sort of moderating force.

Exit question: How would Saddam have reacted over the past 10 years to his archenemies in Iran bringing thousands of new uranium centrifuges online?

CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE VIDEO



TOPICS: Egypt; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia; Syria; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2016election; alqaeda; billclinton; clintoon; dhimmitude; egypt; election2016; hillary; invasion; iran; iraq; isis; jihad; jordan; kurdistan; lebanon; obama; randpaul; randpaultruthfile; ronpaul; ronpaultruthfile; rop; russia; slickwilly; syria; turkey; warofchoice; waronterror; x42

1 posted on 06/26/2014 5:24:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Bill looking in his Crystal Balls again


2 posted on 06/26/2014 5:26:20 PM PDT by molson209 (Blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That’s not true.

The Kurds are separatists. Muslims believe that the big conflict is between Shia and Sunni. It’s just a matter of logistics.


3 posted on 06/26/2014 5:26:26 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So Bill is coming out and saying he disagrees with the way Hillary voted to invade Iraq.


4 posted on 06/26/2014 5:26:29 PM PDT by Iron Munro (The Obamas Black skin has morphed into Teflon thanks to the Obama Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Sorry Clown if your Blackened Sock Puppet, his Wife along with McCain and Graham had not demanded we are the terrorists in Syria and Libya, this would not have happened.


5 posted on 06/26/2014 5:26:38 PM PDT by Trueblackman (As a Conservative, I am proud to be on the Obama's enemy list and on the right side of history..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If Bush had not invaded Iraq, we would might not have Obama either.


6 posted on 06/26/2014 5:26:53 PM PDT by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

With Saddam Houssain still in power, it’s hard to say what would happen but my guess is it wouldn’t be good.


7 posted on 06/26/2014 5:27:56 PM PDT by Vinylly (?%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Just more liberal fantasy, trying to re-write history to favor DemoRat politics. Move along...nothing new here.


8 posted on 06/26/2014 5:29:01 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots

http://lamarzulli.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/shia-vs-sunni-the-coming-war/

http://www.amazon.com/Sunni-Shia-Conflict-Understanding-Sectarian-Violence/dp/098422520X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403828957&sr=1-2&keywords=shia+vs+sunni


9 posted on 06/26/2014 5:29:04 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

And if it weren’t for the Treaty of Versailles we would not have Hitler. It is really easy to make predictions after they happen.


10 posted on 06/26/2014 5:29:38 PM PDT by LukeL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes, if Bill Clinton had not launched missiles into Baghdad to avoid bad press over impeachment, we would not be in this situation.

You’re right for once in your life, Bent One. It is Clinton’s fault.


11 posted on 06/26/2014 5:30:21 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If Clinton had taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance, instead of avoiding the decision at the golf course, perhaps 9/11 wouldn’t have occurred.


12 posted on 06/26/2014 5:35:06 PM PDT by CASchack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

The following Democrats voted for Iraq War Resolution:
58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution. Those voting for the resolution are:

Sens. Lincoln (D-AR), Feinstein (D-CA), Dodd (D-CT), Lieberman (D-CT), Biden (D-DE), Carper (D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Cleland (D-GA), Miller (D-GA), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Breaux (D-LA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Carnahan (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Nelson (D-NE), Reid (D-NV), Torricelli (D-NJ), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Edwards (D-NC), Dorgan (D-ND), Hollings (D-SC), Daschle (D-SD), Johnson (D-SD), Cantwell (D-WA), Rockefeller (D-WV), and Kohl (D-WI).


13 posted on 06/26/2014 5:36:54 PM PDT by donaldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

he’s right. clinton is right.

it would have happened years ago.


14 posted on 06/26/2014 5:38:54 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: molson209

Or snorting a line of cocaine with Obama.


15 posted on 06/26/2014 5:43:17 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If Hillary! had not voted to invade Iraq she and Bubba would be in the Whitehouse now.


16 posted on 06/26/2014 5:43:54 PM PDT by forgotten man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

During Wag the Dog he was busy bombing cardboard tanks.


17 posted on 06/26/2014 5:44:25 PM PDT by boomop1 (term limits will only save this country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
He wasn’t above cooperating with terrorists when it served his interests...

A point that gets lost in all this historical revisionism: Saddam was just fine with terrorist organizations, and the entire reason Bush II invaded Iraq was that he was convinced that Saddam would lend state-level support to Islamic terrorist organizations in the way that Afghanistan already had, and that existing camps in Iraq indicated that Saddam already was. People who knew this perfectly well at the time appear to have forgotten it in the midst of the media blitz since then, and others deny it because it conflicts with their "Bush lied" narrative.

Saddam Hussein was not protecting the United States against terrorism. If he were he'd still be there.

18 posted on 06/26/2014 5:46:21 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
For those who may have forgotten what kind of a President Bill Clinton was:

1) Clinton’s own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:

``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

``The purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people’’ –- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

``We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…that we forget about reality.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful’’’ by Debbie Howlett

“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly… that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare… However, now there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” – Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995

2) Clinton inevitably pursued his own political advantage at the expense of American interests and national security. Here is just one of many possible examples:

It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese People’s Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clinton’s decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.

The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that “the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities.” Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to America’s security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business – a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.

3) On two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:

• On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that day’s grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese “chemical weapons factory,” and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.

Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: "...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development." Kroll Associates, one of the world's most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clinton’s action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.

Clinton’s pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they weren’t a total loss.

•On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."

Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session – when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clinton’s chances of dodging impeachment.

The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.

Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : “We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure,” he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: “We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.”

Whether or not one buys Clinton’s assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachment. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harm’s way for purely political reasons.

4) Clinton’s reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security:

Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was “only about sex.” But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.

To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?

What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?

Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.

And don’t even get me started on the war crime in Kosovo.

WAR IN KOSOVO

During Bill Clinton’s 1999 NATO-led war in Kosovo – which according to some estimates cost as much as $75 billion – we bombed Belgrade for 78 days, killed almost 3,000 civilians, and shredded the civilian infrastructure (including every bridge across the Danube.)

We devastated the environment, bombed the Chinese embassy, came very close to engaging in armed combat against Russian forces, and in general, pursued a horrific and inhumane strategy to rain misery on the civilian population of Belgrade in order to pressure Milosevic into surrendering.

Why did we do all that? The US did not even have an arguable interest in the Balkans, and no one ever tried to claim that Serbia represented any kind of threat to our nation or our interests.

But for months the Clinton administration had told us that Milosevic was waging a vicious genocide against Albanian Muslims, and needed to be stopped. The New York Times called it a “humanitarian war.” In March 1999 – the same month that the bombing started – Clinton’s State Department publicly suggested that as many as 500,000 Albanian Kosovars had been murdered by Milosevic’s regime. In May of that year, as the bombing campaign was drawing to a close, Secretary of Defense William Cohen lowered that estimate 100,000.

Five years after the bombing, after all the forensic investigations had been completed, the prosecutors at Milosevic’s “War Crimes” trial in the Hague were barely been able to document a questionable figure of perhaps 5,000 “bodies and body parts.” During the war, the American people were told that Kosovo was full of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered Albanian Muslims. But none were ever found.

BILL CLINTON ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

During the election cycle of 1992, George H.W. Bush lost his job after Bill Clinton hammered him relentlessly for having caused the “worst economy of the last 50 years.”

In fact, as CNN’s Brooke Jackson has reported: “Three days before Christmas 1992, the National Bureau of Economic Research finally issued its official proclamation that the recession had ended 21 months earlier. What became the longest boom in U.S. history actually began nearly two years before Clinton took office.” See (See http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/31/jackson.recession.primer.otsc/).

By the same token, Clinton is generally perceived as having a stellar economic record during his own presidency, in spite of the fact that the economy was already starting to decline during the last year of his term after the stock market crashed in March 2000.

According to a report by MSNBC: “The longest economic expansion in U.S. history faltered so much in the summer of 2000 that business output actually contracted for one quarter, the government said Wednesday in releasing a comprehensive revision of the gross domestic product. Based on new data, the Commerce Department said that the GDP — the country’s total output of goods and services — shrank by 0.5 percent at an annual rate in the July-September quarter of 2000.” See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3676690/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/gdp-figures-revised-downward/.

19 posted on 06/26/2014 5:48:34 PM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

During the very fast successful thrust into Iraq during the first week Clinton was being interviewed live on CNN and was praising the invasion saying he would have invaded too at that point in the confrontation if he had still been President


20 posted on 06/26/2014 5:50:26 PM PDT by Lib-Lickers 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Klintoon wagging his crooked finger again. His legacy is a stained blue dress.


21 posted on 06/26/2014 5:53:15 PM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yeah, Bill, show them weakness back then rather than today and somehow there is a different outcome...right...got it...


22 posted on 06/26/2014 5:57:47 PM PDT by TalBlack (Evil doesn't have a day job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

Somebody who understands the history of Iraq rather than the fantasy that Saddam Hussein was a pluralist and secularist. Congrats. BTW how many Americans would know who Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas and Abu Zarqawi were and why they were in Baghdad?


23 posted on 06/26/2014 5:58:46 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: All

the guy that officially turned the presidency into a late night punch-line said what? The dress stainer and cigar ruiner said what?


24 posted on 06/26/2014 6:00:58 PM PDT by newnhdad (Our new motto: USA, it was fun while it lasted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes and it is because of his INACTION in Iraq when he was president that we had 911. Thanks for nothing pervert. Why don’t you go crawl back under the rock you came out of. We don’t need you advice and we didn’t ask for it.


25 posted on 06/26/2014 6:01:29 PM PDT by katwoman5779
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"Bill Clinton: If not for the U.S. invasion, none of what’s in Iraq right now would be happening... "

.... And If not for that Choomer in the Whitehouse right now, none of what’s in Iraq right now would be happening.

26 posted on 06/26/2014 6:04:00 PM PDT by R_Kangel ( "A Nation of Sheep ..... Will Beget ..... a Nation Ruled by Wolves.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

...and if only Bill’s mother had aborted, we wouldn’t have to support his sorry ass for the rest of his pathetic life.


27 posted on 06/26/2014 6:07:17 PM PDT by Islander7 (There is no septic system so vile, so filthy, the left won't drink from to further their agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Hey, Slick, if you had been more interested in preventing terrorism and less interested in getting Lewinsky’s under the desk, 9-11 wouldn’t have happened, and if 9-11 didn’t happen, we wouldn’t have invaded Iraq.

So, STFU, and go find some top-heavy slut to pursue.


28 posted on 06/26/2014 6:08:02 PM PDT by Fresh Wind (The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
My American heritage is from South America. I'm familiar with Narco Nations, and I was aware of the fact that Iran paid for Chavez' Presidency. Chavez went on to turn Venezuela into the biggest Drug Distributor in the World. I want to share issues that I consider truth, in a world of deception.

I sense the US is currently a Narco Nation. (A nation who's government is beholden to the all powerful cartels.)

Samuel Hersch, famed author, did a good job of connecting the dots of Obama's illegal use of the US military to go to war in Lybia, Syria, and Pakistan, in his book.

The Red Line and the Rat Line.

Obama's Illegal Use of US Military A True Concern "The real Obama scandal: fighting illegal wars in Libya and Pakistan The AP, IRS and Benghazi controversies are political sideshows. Obama's use of illegal force abroad is true concern" The Guardian 2013.

Carter Deja Vu

Barack Obama, George Soros and Zbigniew Brzezinski are behind the fall of Egypt and the coming Islamic Revolution "Obama and the Shadow Socialist Group Behind Egypt’s Fall made it possible for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over. For those of you who don’t know, Brzezinski is the same man who supervised the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979 under Jimmy Carter."

According to Buried Documents, the Muslim Brotherhood has been in the US since at least 1991.

Those documents reveal their Islamic Revolution plans for the US.

The ridiculously wealthy UAE (Qatar) also seem to be carrying the torch for ensuring an Islamic world under Sharia Law.

Breitbart 2014

Seeds of Terror

How heroin is bankrolling the Taliban and al Qaeda.

2014 Report: Drug shipments off of Africa have "significantly increased since 2009"

Drug trafficking, kidnapping fund al Qaeda CNN 2011

Qatar used as transit point by drug traffickers: Expert 2013

Obama released 5 high risk terrorists, in exchange for an American military deserter, to the care of Qatar, again without congressional approval. This is the same country that the US established for Taliban headquarters in 2011.

Islamic Revolutionaries under tied to the Heroin trade along with most other drugs, as well as human trafficking. Newsweek 2013

Heroin production hits record levels in Afghanistan - study

State Department Reports Hezbollah Increasing Drug and Terrorist in South America 2013

Nisman's report said Iran's intelligence activities in Latin America are being conducted directly by Iranian officials or through a key surrogate, the Hezbollah Islamic militant group. "Criminal plans" by Iran could be under way in Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago, the report said. "They are more involved in the cocaine trade than ever before, and have greater access in the region due their allies in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and elsewhere," Farah said. "So they have more freedom of movement and fewer restrictions. This has greatly increased their capacity to carry out intelligence operations, train and position operatives and prepare attacks, particularly if Israel or the U.S. strikes Iran's nuclear facilities." CNN 2013

Local reports of epidemic heroin abuse across the nation, are mostly ignored by mainstream media. "Once rare, heroin use on the rise" More people seek help; police seeing more on street -2014 “The evidence seems to indicate that the Justice Department not only allowed criminals to smuggle weapons, but that tax payers’ dollars in the form of informant payments, may have financed those engaging in such activities,” the pleading added.

Holder's ATF Arming Sinaloa Cartel, and Informants report on the Justice Dept.

Sinaloa cartel is the same murderous drug cartel that Holder's ATF curiously gave an arsenal of weapons to in the Fast and Furious scandal. The Fast and Furious Red Herring

"The horrific toll of America's heroin 'epidemic' " America's Heroin Epidemic -BBC 2014

CONFIRMED: The DEA Struck A Deal With Mexico's Most Notorious Drug Cartel (They claimed feds agreed they could traffic into Chicago)

"The link between drugs and crime, including violent crime, would be hard to overstate in Chicago. Eighty-six percent of adult males arrested in Chicago last year tested positive for drug use. Chicago, with a population of 2.7 million, had 506 murders in 2012, the highest per capita among the four most populous U.S. cities."

Bloomberg 2013

Australian Navy Seizing Record Amounts of Drugs Off of Africa, in Indian Ocean

Opiates are now the leading cause of accidental deaths, surpassing car crashes and alcohol.

How a big US bank laundered billions from Mexico's murderous drug gangs. "As the violence spread, billions of dollars of cartel cash began to seep into the global financial system. But a special investigation by the Observer reveals how the increasingly frantic warnings of one London whistleblower were ignored- Guardian 2011"

SEC Ignores Wall Street Banks Laundering Billions in Drug Money -2011

JP Morgan openly launders money in cities such as Caracas, Venezuela. Chavez turned that nation into one of the biggest drug distributors of the world. The people have no toilet paper, but they have plenty of cocaine. JP Morgan Laundering Money in Caracas

DEA has been caught laundering money as well, "Agency officials declined to publicly discuss details of their work, citing concerns about compromising their investigations." How convenient?

US Agents Launder Money for the Drug Cartels -NY Times 2011

Banks Laundering Cartel Drug Money

HSBC Bank Laundering for Soros and cartels

There is no War on Drugs.

Drug Legalization was paid for by the Cartel favorite Money Launderer, not citizen activism.

Drug legalization was never about personal liberties. It was about acceptance of drugs. Drugs provided by the cartels, and ease of laundering money by banks.

Feds seek prison for Washington pot growers -Yahoo News 2014

What America isn’t understanding is that Drug Legalization is social engineering at it’s finest. Those who laundered money for the cartels, have been pushing drug legalization, including heroin since the 90’s.

The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power-2004

"The report, which was commissioned by SIGAR, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction makes grim reading, with opium poppy cultivation increasing by over a third, while the country now has about 1.3 million heroin users. This is a ten-fold increase compared to 2005, when around 130,000 people were using the drug."

"Afghanistan is responsible for about three-quarters of the world’s heroin production, with much of it being cultivated in the Helmand and Kandahar provinces in the south of the country. However, the US has concentrated most of its efforts in the east of Afghanistan, which has relatively little poppy production, as it is safer than working in the south."


"The link between drugs and crime, including violent crime, would be hard to overstate in Chicago. Eighty-six percent of adult males arrested in Chicago last year tested positive for drug use. Chicago, with a population of 2.7 million, had 506 murders in 2012, the highest per capita among the four most populous U.S. cities."

Heroin Pushed into Chicago

$Billions in influence cartel influence peddling, and lobbying, is what has led people to believe that the war on drugs was useless. If you dont believe these ruthless sociopaths are going after your children, think again.

George Soros creates Methadone Superhero to Market drugs to Kids.

This level of trafficking would not happen without government complicity. Heroin isn't grown here, and it is cheaper and easier for kids to get than beer.

29 posted on 06/26/2014 6:23:08 PM PDT by mgist (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
True, but if not for Obama’s surrender and lack of leadership and his appeasement and his support of the Mullahs, attack on Gadafi, and failure to follow through in Syria - Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lybia would be stable.

El-Presidente has an amazing knack for siding with the wrong people.

30 posted on 06/26/2014 6:26:31 PM PDT by logic101.net (How many more children must die on the altar of gun free zones?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Question...was it Clinton or Bush who created the Iraqi Liberation Act (ILA) which called for the US to do regime change in Iraq?

It was Clinton. What a scum he is.

31 posted on 06/26/2014 6:28:28 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lib-Lickers 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457jp8VGhEE


32 posted on 06/26/2014 6:28:40 PM PDT by CommieCutter ("For an idea to be too simplistic, it must first be proven wrong" --Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

You are absolutely right. How quickly we forget.


33 posted on 06/26/2014 6:33:54 PM PDT by Jay Redhawk (Oh Crap!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

Thing is we don’t know what would have happened had we not going to Iraq. One can only imagine the mischief Sadam would have caused.

But regardless of whether Bush did the right on wrong thing, every president gets dealt a hand when he takes over and he should make the best of it. Obama has totally butchered his in both domestic and foreign policies.


34 posted on 06/26/2014 6:55:27 PM PDT by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CASchack

“If Clinton had taken out Bin Laden when he had the chance, instead of avoiding the decision at the golf course, perhaps 9/11 wouldn’t have occurred.”

Worth repeating.


35 posted on 06/26/2014 6:58:57 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
If not for the U.S. invasion, none of what’s in Iraq right now would be happening

MR. PRESIDENT. Have you forgotten that the sanctions that killed 500,000 children and teenagers in Iraq during your Presidency were lifted as a direct result of the war? If we had continued with your policies of sanctions and occasional bombings, how many would be dead by now?

36 posted on 06/26/2014 7:02:22 PM PDT by TwelveOfTwenty (See my home page for some of my answers to the left's talking points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He’s right. Oh, God! I just threw up a little.


37 posted on 06/26/2014 7:11:59 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (Liberals were raised by women or wimps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mgist
I agree with you—the corrupting influence of the Cartels in this country is being willfully ignored. They are as evil as the Islamists and the long term influences may be indistinguishable, if they don't end up morphing into the same entity. Evil is blanketing the earth like a black, creeping tide.
38 posted on 06/26/2014 7:41:02 PM PDT by binreadin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: katwoman5779
Yes and it is because of his INACTION in Iraq when he was president that we had 911. Thanks for nothing pervert. Why don’t you go crawl back under the rock you came out of. We don’t need you advice and we didn’t ask for it.

Thanks kat, I couldn't have said it better.......

39 posted on 06/26/2014 7:43:22 PM PDT by eeriegeno (<p>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Yes, if Bill Clinton had not launched missiles into Baghdad to avoid bad press over impeachment, we would not be in this situation.

You’re right for once in your life, Bent One. It is Clinton’s fault.

Funny how the peanut packer and his incompetence gets left out of the discussion.

40 posted on 06/26/2014 8:50:47 PM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It is pointless to hypothetically analyze this. We had two no fly zones in affect over Iraq. In the North, to protect the Kurds. And in the south to protect the Shia. Would terrorists have been able to gain a hold in Iraq when Saddam was more or less sequestered around Baghdad ? Eventually yes. Would terrorists have proliferated faster without ground troops in Iraq in these Saddam-lite regions ? Probably yes. Bill Clinton is ignoring the no fly zones because it does not help his crooked miserable wife.


41 posted on 06/26/2014 9:54:41 PM PDT by justa-hairyape (The user name is sarcastic. Although at times it may not appear that way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt's Generals: 'How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?'
Sen. Rand Paul is hammering his fellow senators for keeping billions in financial aid flowing to Egypt's military -- even as Cairo's security forces massacre anti-government activists. [by "anti-government activists" is meant church-burning Christian-murdering jihadists]
[Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat]

42 posted on 12/14/2014 3:00:02 AM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/ _____________________ Celebrate the Polls, Ignore the Trolls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Everybody forgets that Saddam supported the Sunni jihadists who tried to overthrow Hafez Assad in the early 80’s, so what makes people think he wouldn’t support the current generation of Sunni jihadists in Syria. Also, Saddam would have brutally cracked down on the Arab Spring like Qaddafi and Assad and liberals would have clamored for a humanitarian intervention in Iraq, similar to Libya and Syria.


43 posted on 12/18/2014 10:03:52 AM PST by Revenge of Sith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson