Thursday, January 31, 2008

President Clinton orders attack on Iraq

I think it is interesting how President Bush is called a liar and this attack was ordered to divert attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal....or was it? You see dems are hypocrites if they say it was a diversion, then their man attacked an undeserving country for the sake of taking the attention off the scandal......if it wasn't a diversion then Iraq was a real threat and that makes them big fat bitter partisans. Which one was it donkey's?? partisan politics are so ugly.

3 comments:

Mike said...

Hey, Nikki. You know I have to weigh in on this!

The main difference is that in 1998, Saddam was not complying with the UN inspection process (as Clinton states in the video.) He argues that if the US doesn't smack Saddam, then he will feel that he can do whatever he wants. He states several times that the threat from Saddam is that he will start to develop illegal weapons again, not that he had the weapons at the time. The airstrikes were (ostensibly) to prevent Saddam from starting up his programs again.

Bush manufactured intelligence to support his plans to go to war. In 2002, Saddam was complying with the UN inspectors. I linked (in my post about the SOTU) to a report delivered by Hans Blix to the UN in which he stated,

"The most important point to make is that access has been provided to all sites we have wanted to inspect. And with one exception, it has been [without] problems."

So to sum up: Clinton didn't want a war, he wanted to force Saddam to comply with the UN inspection process. Bush wanted a war, so he lied about Saddam not letting the inspectors in, falsified intelligence, ignored the UN, and gave the finger to pretty much anyone who opposed the plan to invade Iraq.

Nikki said...

Bush didn't want war just like Clinton wasn't masking his scandal. Which one seems more plausible an attack such as the one Bill Clinton ordered or an attack after 9/11 like the on Bush ordered. Talk about not being attacked Clinton had no basis. At least Bush was looking at an on soil attack and the leap from Al Quaeda isn't that far to Saddam.....they all share hatred for the US and they are all extremeists. Bush had far more reason to attack than Clinton did....thanks Mike hope things are going good for you and you getting some writing in!! :)N

King Coby said...

Oh Nikki...... you are incredibly blind and part of the Problem not he Solution. I won't go so far as to say Bush is a Liar. He is just so ignorant that he allowed the likes of his VP, Rummy, and Rove to guide him. No he isnt a liar or the devil either. He's just plain old stupid! Colin Powell was an incredible leader and look what W did to him. Your hate for Bill Clinton is evident, The last time I checked getting a blow job is far less heinous than sending American boys to do the job for Arabic boys. Oh and remember its Nuclear not Nuke U Ler! In 2020 We will be the Majority and your opinion wont matter anyway! Enjoy while you can!!!!