Double talk (caution: political thread)

[homerjdispatch]

WMD ???????????? HMMMM.... "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"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.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.


"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that. Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of an illlicit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN 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..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force-- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002, "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his mi ssile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.

"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? RIGHT!!!

 

[Erlanger]

We know they're lying two-bit hypocritical scumbags!!
I hope Bush uses their own words in his re-election campaign commercials. Saturate the airways with this.
Them Democrats will just go nuts.

 

[Freight Dog]

I'll take a bite... I'm a Republican though, but I think Bush failed miserably in Iraq. He should have handled it way differently. See my posts in the Political Thread.

To sum it up... either let our troops do the job right or bring them home and forget about the whole thing.

Either way, the U.S. is not ready to fight the kind of war we need to win over there. Iraqis fought dirty from day 1. We need to fight dirtier, but imagine the outcry of American public if we indeed started fighting dirty.

 

[Singlecoil]

Ever heard of snopes.com? You should look into it.

 

[Q200_FO]

Wow, did it take you all day to write that? I don't ever remember anybody ever saying outright that Saddam never, ever at any time had any WMD's. The beef is how Bush dealt with the situation and about how he ESCALATED the situation just to promote his case for going to war. Did Saddam have a huge stockpile of WMD's or whas he just breaking everybody's balls and just had one barrel full of material? We'll never know now because Bush told the world to f*uck off last March and nobody got the chance to go over there and inspect the place. We all know that he had something going on over there but was it enough to go to war and pour more than 160 billion dollars into? From what I see and have seen so far, I say no.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Do you have a link to the CIA's statement that Saddam definitely posessed WMD's? You've posted a lot of statements made by uninformed politicians about what they thought Saddam wanted to do or appeared to be doing. How about showing us the conclusive statement about what weapons Saddam had?

You don't have that link, do you?

If Saddam was such a potential threat to U.S. security, why the hell didn't W. go get him the day he got into office? For that matter, if Clinton dropped the ball with respect to getting Bin Laden and his cronies, why didn't W. go get them the same day?

Is the Democratic leadership stupid? Yes, but lets be fair.

 

[bart]

The real and true difference:

Democrats make threats and talk big and engage in wars only when America has no interests involved, and when they do, only Europe has the right to order our troops in

Republicans prosecute and win wars and do what has to be done, even when Europe protests our invading their largest cash paying customer

It is that simple.

 

[Timebuilder]

Did Saddam have a huge stockpile of WMD's or whas he just breaking everybody's balls and just had one barrel full of material? We'll never know now because Bush told the world to f*uck off last March and nobody got the chance to go over there and inspect the place.

Even though you tried to answer your own question (I guess it was sort of a rhetorical question) you should look into the 1998 weapons inspectors' report that details what THEY thought was the type and amounts, based on what Sadaam had let them see.

Then Sadaam stoped cooperating entirely.

If by "the world", you mean the French, then yeah, screw 'em.

A larger country full of ungrateful jackasses I have never seen. Their precious cusine would be centered around weinerschnitzel if it weren't for us. Now, they simply need a bath and to sit down and shut up.

Ever smell the inside of an Air France aircraft??? Whew!!

All kidding aside, the French and the other dissenting countries are wrong on this one. I'm not terribly disturbed by that, either.

 

[whosyodaddy]

It seems to be the time of year that folks are in the mood to make lists, and airline pilots are getting onto some of them. AVweb told you last month that a federal report found a job as a commercial pilot to be one of the top 10 most dangerous jobs in the U.S. Now a financial writer for CBS, Chris Plummer, has come up with a list of the top 10 most overpaid workers -- and guess who's on it? Airline pilots come in at number 9, just above wedding photographers and just below West Coast longshoremen. Plummer claims no statistical proof for his ranking, just his opinion, but with "input from compensation experts." He notes that an airline pilot's job is mostly automated, and the folks who really should be getting the big bucks -- the ones who keep all those passengers from falling out of the sky -- are not the pilots but the mechanics. Then again, the mechanics remain safely on the ground. We wonder if those compensation experts took that into account?

--AvFlash

Load of Crap!

 

[WrightAvia]

There's a big difference in the dangers of working as a commercial pilot and the wheelbarrows of cash some airline pilots take home for flying two trips a month in modern jet airliner.

An article on how dangerous commercial piloting is while performing the duties of an AG pilot, check hauler, CFI, pipline patrol, target, banner or glider tow pilot, skydiver driver, 135 cargo pilot, fish and game pilot, fire patrol and supression pilot, police helicopter and fixed wing pilot, has nothing to do with an article on the media's perception of excessive wages recieved by major airline pilots.

Two separate subjects.